CAN GRAVITY be INDUCED?

 

                       CAN GRAVITY be INDUCED?

    

                   

           Observational Evidence and Verifiable Proof for 

                         A Dynamic GRAVAC Sun

                                  by

                        Stephen Paul Goodfellow

         

                                 1987

CONTENT:

              Introduction                      Page  3    

              A Solar Shell                           4

              Proof                                   4

              Elusive Neutrinos                       5

              Sunspots                                6

              Thought Model                           6

              Plasma: The Super-Hot Gas               7

              Rudiments of the dynamic GRAVAC Cycle   8

              Helioseismology - The Ring of Truth     9

              Related Natural Phenomena               9

              Mr. Science & the Breezy Room          10

              Nature's Gravity Wells                 10 

              Consequences of a GRAVAC Sun           11 

              Conclusion                             12

              Credits                                14

              References                             15

                            INTRODUCTION

It  has long been believed  that gravity is the fundamental  cause  of 

solar radiation. 

The  presently  popular  Hydrogen/Fusion  Core  theory  rests  on  the 

assumption  that  the  mutual gravitational attraction  of  the  Sun's 

individual atoms override all other acting forces, thereby causing the 

Suns  mass  to contract. This in turn creates the  internal  pressures 

which inaugurate nuclear fusion within the Sun's core.

This  scenario appears to be reasonably logical at a glance, but  when 

viewed  in  the  sharp light of  observational  evidence,  it  becomes 

glaringly  obvious that the reasoning upon which  the  Hydrogen/Fusion 

Core theory rests is unsound  and quite erroneous.

Despite  the fact that virtually every major solar observation  is  at 

odds  with this popular solar model, physicists continue to  subscribe 

to it because there does not seem to be a logical alternative. 

The wound caused by this dilemma is deep and there for all to see; the 

ability  to  control a sustained fusion reaction  continues  to  elude 

researchers, chiefly because of the alchemic approach with which  they 

attempt to apply their craft. 

The reason for this sad state of affairs is simple: Fusion research is 

so  costly  that in their eagerness to magnetically  cage  the  fusion 

reaction, scientists forgo the necessary research needed to understand 

what goes on in the fusion process. 

It is not unlike a blind man attempting to restrain a beast he  cannot 

see;  the blind man builds traps and cages without  understanding  the 

nature of the beast. 

Such an attempt must surely end in failure.

PLASMA is the name of the beast that we must strive to understand;  it 

is  a   super  hot gas of disassociated electrons  and  protons.  When 

united  within  a common magnetic field it is  capable  of  performing 

incredible configurations. 

Its  nature is so different from solid, liquid or gas states, that  it 

has been designated a state of matter in its own right: a plasma,  the  

fourth state of matter.

Faced  with  such an awesome discovery, it would  seem  reasonable  to 

assume nothing is as we expected it to be. In the light of this  newly 

discovered  state  of matter, we should proceed as if  perceiving  the 

universe  for  the first time. NONE of the four known  forces  in  the 

universe  ( the Strong, Weak, Electromagnetic and gravitational,)  nor 

their interactions with the known states of matter - may be taken  for 

granted when we know there is a new player on the field.

When  the dynamic state of the plasma was realized,  solar  physicists 

seem   to  have  been  reluctant  to  consider  the  Sun   anew;   the 

intermittently arriving new knowledge of  plasma states continue to be 

ignored  or   hastily incorporated into a solar theory  already  beset 

with  unreconcilable  contradictions, resulting in  a  hodge-podge  of 

discontinuous conjectures. 

The  focal  point of this current dilemma lies in the  fact  that  our 

science   community   suffers  from  an  unshakable   faith   in   the 

inviolableness  of  mass/gravity.  It is taken for  granted  that  the 

gravitational  force is dependent on the quantity of  matter  present. 

This is an unproven conjecture - an act of faith.

Such an attitude has for too many years confined potentially  creative 

ideas  within constrictions which in reality do not exist.  I  believe 

strongly  that such unbending dogma does not belong in the  quest  for 

truth, because it has no relation to the objective universe.

 

A SOLAR SHELL

Our  Sun  is  empty;  its mass is distributed  in  a  shell  about  an 

"Absolute vacuum."

As  I shall demonstrate, an Absolute vacuum induces gravity; it  is  a 

rift  upon  which  mass/energy space  gravitationally  implodes.  This 

implosion continuously heats the Sun's plasma which in turn  maintains 

the  Sun's Absolute vacuum. I call this the Gravity/Vacuum  Cycle,  or 

the GRAVAC Cycle.

The electromagnetic potential of a given quantity of mass in a  plasma 

state  is 1 X 10 to the 40th times stronger(1) than its  gravitational 

potential. Because of this, the Sun can radiate by the interlocking of 

an   induced  gravitational  force  that  is  brought  about  by   the 

electromagnetic force.

This  comes about because the Sun's plasma is magnetically  polarized, 

repelling  electrons from electrons and protons from protons. By  this 

process  the mass of the Sun is magnetically repulsed and flies  apart 

creating  an  Absolute Vacuum. In turn, this Absolute  Vacuum  induces 

gravity.  The induced gravity restrains the Sun's plasma from  further 

outward  expansion,  and  it is the struggle  between  the  inhibiting 

induced  gravity and the repulsive magnetic properties of  the  plasma 

which cause the solar shell to radiate.

PROOF

For this solar model to work, it requires that absolutely no mass, nor 

radiation  can  travel  through an  Absolute  vacuum.  Therefore,  the 

experimental  evidence  of  this solar model rests  on  the  following 

proof:

*It can be demonstrated that neutrinos cannot pass through the Sun*

 

Small  subatomic particles called neutrinos emanate from stars.(2)  To 

an  observer  on Earth, each star has its  own  neutrino  fingerprint, 

which  can  be determined by the angle of neutrino  approach  and  the 

different neutrino energy levels that individual stars produce. 

Because  neutrinos are so small and have no charge, most are  able  to 

pass  through  the  Earth without  hitting  anything.  Astrophysicists 

believe  that a flow of neutrinos  would pass through the Sun  without 

the majority of the neutrinos being stopped by collisions.(3) 

But is this so?

Imagine  that you are observing neutrinos emanating from an  energetic 

star  which  is  about to be eclipsed by the Sun.  When  the  star  is 

eclipsed, present logic would dictate that neutrinos from the eclipsed 

star would pass through the Sun. 

I propose that they will not. 

It is my prediction that the neutrino flow from the star will stop  at 

the moment of occultation ( when the star passes behind the sun.)  The 

reason for this is because the Sun's interior is not a ball of mass in 

conventional  space, as it is presently believed;(4) on the  contrary, 

it is an Absolute vacuum through which nothing passes.

Of course, it is not so easy to look for neutrinos passing through the 

Sun.  An  actual  experiment  would be  more  complicated,  but  could 

probably be performed along these lines:

Due  to the fact that neutrino collisions are scarce, one has to  rely 

on  a  record  compiled  through time in  order  to  get  an  accurate 

determination. You will need a computer and as extensive a compilation 

of recorded data of neutrino collisions as possible. The greater  span 

of time the records cover, the more accurate the result.

Take  the  orbit of the Sun ( as seen from Earth,) and break  it  down 

into  365 windows or 'sectors' on the plane of the ecliptic,  one  for 

each  day of a year. The Sun will pass through all 365 sectors in  one 

year, spending 24 hours in each sector.

Design  a  program  for  the computer so that it  will  list  all  the 

neutrinos with an angle of approach that comes within the band divided 

into 365 sectors. 

Eliminate  all  neutrinos  from  your data  that  show  energy  levels 

consistent with those of our Sun. 

Now compile the sectors that the Sun was in each day. Compare them  to 

the 364 other sectors that the Sun was not in.

If  present  theories on stellar physics are correct,  then  neutrinos 

from  stellar and galactic sources should flow unimpaired through  the 

Sun, and there will be  NO DISCERNIBLE QUANTITATIVE DIFFERENCE between 

the Sun sectors and the 364 other sectors that the Sun was not in. 

This will not be so. 

I  predict  that  the  data will  exhibit  a  CONSISTENT  DECREASE  of 

interstellar and intergalactic neutrinos within the solar sectors.

  ELUSIVE NEUTRINOS

This  chapter  offers  observational  evidence  which  led  me  to  my         

conclusions.

Problem:

Dr.  Raymond  Davis  of the Brookhaven National  Laboratory  has  been 

monitoring  the emanation of neutrons from the Sun since 1967, and  he 

has demonstrated that the flow of these neutrinos amounts to less than 

1/3  of  the amount anticipated by the current  hydrogen  fusion  core 

theories.(5) Why?

Solution:

The deficiency in the neutrino count may be accounted for as  follows;  

neutrinos  originate from, or near, the Sun's surface.  Since  nothing 

can  travel  through  the Sun's  Absolute vacuum  interior,  only  the 

neutrinos produced on the side of the Sun facing us reach the Earth.

Those neutrinos originating from the   opposite side of the Sun cannot 

penetrate  the Sun's absolute vacuum interior and so escape the  Earth 

based observer. 

This  is the cause for the lesser neutrino flow observed to be  coming 

from the Sun.

Problem:

When  sunspots  occur  on the Sun's photosphere,  the  neutrino  count 

drops.

Neutrinos  have  no charge and so cannot be affected by  the  magnetic 

field of sunspots on the Sun's surface.

If  neutrinos originate from the Sun's core and travel outwards,  then 

sunspots  on  the photospheric surface should have no  effect  on  the 

neutrinos.  These  subatomic  particles should pass  to  the  observer 

unimpeded,  yet  the  neutrino  count  is  diminished  during  sunspot 

activity.(6) Why?

Solution:

Neutrinos originate near the Sun's photospheric surface.

Within  sunspots  there is decreased temperature  and  luminosity,  so 

there  is less likelihood of neutrino production; hence a decrease  of 

neutrinos during sunspot activity.

 SUNSPOTS

Problem:

Sunspots are depressions in the Sun's photospheric surface.(7) If  the 

interior  of a sunspot is closer to the Sun's supposed core, why  does 

it get cooler and darker and not hotter and brighter in these areas?

Solution:

The Sun has no core. 

A  sunspot  depression  is darker because it is closer  to  the  Sun's 

Absolute vacuum interior.

THOUGHT MODEL

If the Sun's mass is only a thin shell of matter, how does one account 

for its powerful gravitational attraction?

It is time for a thought model. 

Imagine  the  air in front of you. Imagine now that you  can  apply  a 

force  to  expel  the air away from a given volume.   First,  you  may 

notice that the most efficient shape to maintain a vacuum is a sphere.

Next,  you  might observe that the exterior air is  attracted  to  the 

vacuum  --  an  attraction which falls away with  the  square  of  the 

distance from the source. This attraction is a feature which  exhibits 

the same characteristics as the force of gravity.

To illustrate this concept, stir a cup of tea or coffee and  carefully 

pour in some milk. Notice how the interior of the vortex moves  faster 

than the area further out from the vortex.

A  vortex has a low pressure interior and high pressure  exterior.  It 

behaves in a manner identical to that of the planets orbiting the Sun, 

in that both phenomena obey Kepler's Second Law of Planetary Motion(8) 

- which is a notable characteristic of gravity.

Another  way  you  can observe this attraction at work is  to  hold  a 

vacuum cleaner nozzle up to a source of smoke. The attraction of smoke 

to  the  vacuum nozzle will fall off with the square of  the  distance 

from the nozzle, just like gravity.

Let us take our thought model into the real universe.

Space  - any space - anywhere, contains a measure of mass/energy.  The 

proof of this is the Background Radiation which pervades our universe. 

Even  the 'thinnest' space is a veritable soup of  radiation,  virtual 

particles  and  even whole atoms passing through any given  volume  at 

phenomenal speeds.(9) 

It  follows that the laws of pressure that we applied to  our  thought 

model  should  hold true anywhere in the universe; wherever  there  is 

pressure, a vacuum will attract. 

If an Absolute vacuum were possible, what behavior would we expect  of 

its nature? How would the universe respond to such a phenomenon?

Dictionaries  describe a vacuum as: 'A space devoid of  matter.'  This 

definition is no longer a sufficient description of a vacuum, since it 

appears  that  all  space in the Universe  contains  some  measure  of 

mass/energy.  Perhaps  a better description would be: 'A Vacuum  is  a 

volume devoid of space.'

Such a volume might be quite different from conventional space.  Since 

temperature  is  a result of mass/energy space, it  is  reasonable  to 

assume  that  the temperature of an Absolute Vacuum must  be  absolute 

zero.

If time is a consequence of mass/energy space, then an Absolute Vacuum 

must  be  without time. An observer within such a field would  not  be 

affected  by the time frame of exterior space; time would stand  still 

for that observer while the exterior universe raced on.

A  magnetic  field  is a manifestation of mass/energy but  it  is  NOT 

mass/energy  in itself. Because of this it seems reasonable to  assume 

that a magnetic field may exist within an absolute vacuum. 

In  our  thought  model  we used an  imaginary  force  to  maintain  a 

continuous vacuum. Is there any way of demonstrating the existence  of 

this force?

PLASMA: THE SUPER-HOT GAS

As I mentioned in the introduction, it was not long ago, that  physics 

classified matter into only three states: Solid, liquid, and gas. 

It  was not realized until recently that a gas heated to a  very  high 

temperature  does not obey the law of gasses; it displays  a  behavior 

unique  to its own nature and scientists have only recently  begun  to 

probe its secrets.(10) So different is this state from a regular  gas, 

that it has been classified as a fourth state of matter: a plasma.(11)

Because all stars consist of this super-hot gas, it is estimated  that 

over  ninety  percent  of  the  known  universe  exists  in  a  plasma 

state.(12) 

Put  simply,   plasma  is  a super-hot gas  in  which   electrons  are 

stripped away from protons, placing particles of like polarity in  the 

same camp.

Plasmas  which are shot through a plasma gun ( a magnetic field,)  and 

into  a  vacuum tube display well  defined  structure.  Unfortunately, 

because  of  the speed (120 miles per second,) with which  the  plasma 

makes its way down the vacuum tube, photos reveal only a glimmering of 

the  complexity that can be contributed to plasma structure.  However, 

it  is known that the plasma structure can evolve  into  a  helix-like 

flow composed of two separate streams, one consisting of electrons and 

the  other  of  protons. Furthermore, it has been  observed  that  the 

structure  as  a  whole  maintains a stable shape  that  can  best  be 

described as a cross between a doughnut and a "Slinky" -  a toy spring 

that can 'walk' down a staircase, -  turned in on itself.(13) 

It  is  significant  that  electrons and  protons  can  organize  into 

separate  camps, because like particles of the same charge  repel  one 

another.

If  it is possible to produce a plasma configuration where the  mutual 

repulsion  of particles occur, then it is likely that the volume  left 

in their wake is an Absolute Vacuum.

It  strikes me that it would be a fruitful enterprise to monitor  some 

future plasma experiments with a sensitive gravimeter to see if  known 

plasma configurations exhibit inducing gravity characteristics. 

RUDIMENTS OF THE DYNAMIC GRAVAC CYCLE

Although it is highly possible that the following scenario is a  gross 

oversimplification, I believe it to be an accurate thumbnail rendition 

of  the Sun's mode of propagation. I call it the Solar  Gravity/Vacuum 

Cycle, or the Solar GRAVAC cycle:

Imagine  a  gaseous giant, perhaps a little bigger than  Jupiter.  The 

gravitational sum of its mass causes intense pressure and so generates 

atomic fusion at its center. 

The  fusion reaction splits up protons and electrons which are  forced 

into like camps, where they repel one another.

However,  the  plasma  can only travel  outwards  a  finite  distance, 

because it has left an Absolute Vacuum in its wake.

The attraction of mass/energy space towards the Absolute Vacuum causes 

a gravitational implosion.

The plasma has nowhere to go. It cannot go further inwards, because of 

the  repulsive magnetic field; nor can it expand outwards, due to  the 

gravity holding it back - what's a plasma to do?

To  answer this question, try the following:  Rub your hands  together 

fast and furious. See how they get hot?

The  solar  hydrogen  shell is under intense pressure  at  the  vacuum 

boundary  and  this causes the Sun's radiation.  The  released  energy 

maintains  the plasma because electrons are stripped from protons  and 

so  the cycle repeats, thereby maintaining the radiation of  the  Sun. 

The  energy  needed to maintain a total vacuum of a  given  volume  is 

equal  to the energy radiating from its boundary. In the case  of  our 

sun, that is 3.38 X 10 to the 33 ergs/sec.(14) 

Let us now review the cycle:

A primordial giant planet - larger than Jupiter - inaugurates standard 

gravitational  compression in core  of  proto-sun...Pressure...Nuclear 

Fusion.....Plasma.....Electrons     form    Camp/     Protons     form 

Camp....Magnetic repulsion....Induced Gravitational Attraction...

And then back to ' Pressure.'....

This concept is in harmony with the conservation of angular  momentum, 

in that it accounts for the relatively slow rotation of our Sun. 

Jupiter,  the  fifth  planet from the Sun, has  by  far  the  greatest 

portion of angular momentum of the Solar System. If the Sun contracted 

from  a cloud of hydrogen, one would expect the center to  rotate  the 

fastest,  like a spinning ice skater will rotate faster if  she  draws 

her  arms into her side. The GRAVAC scenario suggests that  the  early 

proto-Sun's  spin was considerable while it was a dense ball of  mass, 

but as it inaugurated nuclear fusion and expanded into a thin shell of 

plasma, it lost its angular momentum - like the ice skater letting her 

arms out and slowing down.(15)

 

HELIOSEISMOLOGY - THE RING OF TRUTH

A whole new science has recently sprung up called Helioseismology.  It 

has  been  observed that the Sun vibrates, rather like a bell.  It  is 

presently  believed that solar resonances are propagated  acoustically 

from the Sun's core.(16)

But is this so?

Solar  oscillations  came as a complete surprise  to  solar  theorists 

because  one  does not usually associate structures  that  get  denser 

towards  their  center as good candidates for  effective  oscillators. 

Hollow  structures,  such as bells are good oscillators; so too  is  a 

GRAVAC Sun.

We  know  from studying the powerful magnetic fields that  erupt  from 

sunspot  depressions that the Sun is capable of  propagating  interior 

magnetic fields reaching thousands of gauss.(17)

It  is  this  interior  field  which  causes  the  Sun's  magnetically 

sensitive outer shell to dance upon the interior magnetic field,  like 

the oscillations produced by an acoustic speaker. 

A  blind-folded  person would be hard pressed to tell  whether  he  is 

being addressed directly or via a speaker.

The  same  is true for Helioseismology; the observer is blind  to  the 

interior and so the information is interpreted in the light of present 

concepts of solar theory.

Helioseismologists have discovered a condition in the Sun's  shallower 

layers  which  is at variance with conventional core  models:  Through 

frequency splittings resulting from the Sun's rotation, it is observed 

that  the rotation actually decreases with depth. It is hard  for  any 

core  theory to come to terms with this lack of angular  momentum.(18) 

This  observation  of  the Sun suggests an inversion -  a  sun  turned 

inside out.

RELATED NATURAL PHENOMENA

Vocal  cords  produce compressional waves ( high and low  pressures  ) 

that  travel  through the air. These waves are received  by  the  ear, 

which   converts   them  into  electro-chemical  impulses   that   are 

distributed to the relevant centers of the brain.(19)

The  ear also acts as a mechanism of body balance;  the  semi-circular 

canals  allow  the  brain to determine the position  of  the  head  in 

relation to the gravitational attraction of the Earth.

If pressure and gravity were two separate and unrelated forces,  would 

one not expect to find two distinctly separate organs to monitor these 

phenomena?

A  plane flies through the air; its forward motion produces a flow  of 

air above the wing which creates a standing low pressure center.(20)

The plane is sucked into the air, away from the Earth's  gravitational 

field.  Again we observe an interplay between the forces  of  pressure 

and gravity.

When a rocket in space fires its engines, the same interplay of forces 

are  at work. The rocket places a high pressure behind itself;  in  so 

doing it can be said that a low pressure center exists in front of the 

rocket, and the rocket moves in that direction.

MR. SCIENCE & THE BREEZY ROOM

I  have constructed a very special room. Its design allows for a  flow 

of  air through the ceiling and floor of the room. It has  no  windows 

and whoever is inside is unable to make any exterior observations.  As 

with  Einstein's famous accelerating rocket,(21) the observer is  free 

to  draw conclusions from any phenomena that take place in  the  room, 

but he is unaware of the exterior environment.

We  now  place  a  fan above the roof of the  room  which  forces  air 

downwards. Air flows through the room and Mr. Science takes note.

The room is now placed on a high tower some distance above the  Earth. 

Imagine that we now pile an enormous quantity of air above the  tower. 

Due to the Earths gravitational attraction which causes the atmosphere 

'hug' the planet, the air will flow back towards the Earth and  regain 

its composure.

In  doing so, the air will also flow through Mr. Science's room  -  he 

takes note.

When  asked about the nature of the two experiments, he tells us  that 

he  believes them to be identical - a flow of air from top to  bottom. 

He  is unaware that the first experiment was the result  of  pressure; 

nor does he know that the second experiment was caused by gravity.  He 

therefore  concludes that the nature of the force that  propelled  the 

air  through the room was the same in both instances; to Mr.  Science, 

pressure_and_gravity_are_identical!

NATURE'S GRAVITY WELLS

Earlier,  I mentioned that a vortex in a stirred cup of coffee  mimics 

the  force  of gravity. This phenomena is not limited to our  cup;  it 

manifests itself throughout nature's domain.

The  low pressure eye of a hurricane is a strangely tranquil place  in 

which  there is little wind and the blue sky can be seen above,  while 

on  all sides the high pressure fury circulates. Such is the power  of 

the  hurricane's eye that the ocean has been observed to rise  several 

feet  higher  in  this center than the  ocean  level  surrounding  the 

eye.(22)

This  rise  in  sea  level  is caused  by  the  low  pressure  of  the 

hurricane's eye; the mass of the ocean in the eye is attracted to  the 

relative vacuum. As with gravity, the attraction to the eye falls  off 

with the square of the distance from its center.

Spiral  galaxies mimic the vortex and their shape leaves us with  some 

perplexing questions: If galaxies are gravitationally-bound systems in 

dynamic  equilibrium,  they should consist of enough  matter  to  hold 

themselves together.

Surprisingly, it would appear that there is not enough matter  present 

in  galaxies  to  achieve  this, thereby giving  rise  to  the  famous 

'Missing Mass Problem'.(23)

How  does  a spiral galaxy obtain the additional  gravitational  force 

when  it  does  not have a corresponding quantity  of  matter?  Is  it 

possible that its high energy center is an Absolute Vacuum?

If the GRAVAC scenario proves correct, then it is not an  unreasonable 

speculation  that galactic centers of a spiral galaxies  are  inducing 

gravity without a corresponding quantity of mass.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF A GRAVAC SUN

The  concept  of Absolute Vacuums may go some way  to  explain  Olbers 

Paradox,  which states that, if space is infinite, why is the sky  not 

bright with radiative sources?

If space is interrupted with Absolute Vacuums, - and there would be as 

many of these as there are stars - then any given area of space  would 

in effect be 'shielded' from other quadrants.

If the Sun is merely a shell of mass and so has considerably less mass 

than  hitherto expected, then it cannot afford to merely drift  around 

living  off  its limited mass, or it would soon expend its  supply  of 

fuel.  This suggests that there must be some mechanism  through  which 

the Sun replenishes its dwindling fuel supply.

I  would suggest that it does this by orbiting the  galaxy,  'feeding' 

off  the  clouds and globules that pervade the Milky  Way.  The  Sun's 

magnetic  and  gravitational  capacity make  for  an  efficient  'food 

foraging' mechanism. Both nebulae and Sun travel in the same direction 

about  the  galaxy,  like cars traveling in the same  direction  on  a 

highway.

Although  the Sun is unlikely to collide with the nebulae on  a  given 

trajectory, their mutual gravitational attraction will alter the Sun's 

course  towards  the cloud and the Sun will plunge into  the  nebula's 

hydrogen-rich interior.

It is estimated that the Sun's magnetic influence reaches well  beyond 

the planets of our solar system. When highly accelerated particles  of 

the  solar wind collide with the gas and dust of space, electrons  and 

protons are knocked off from one another, thus making these  particles 

within the Sun's heliosphere magnetically sensitive. This is  somewhat 

similar  to the static cling you get in a drier. The charged  particle 

follows the magnetic fieldlines to the north or south pole of the Sun, 

depending on the polarity of the particle. The Sun's gravitational and 

magnetic fields are an effective means of sweeping the galactic  plane 

for matter. 

We can see this effect on a smaller scale with our own planet when  we 

watch  the  cascade of particles coming to Earth in the  form  of  the 

Aurora Borealis. 

In the same way the Sun consumes the matter which is necessary for its 

continued existence.

Our Sun is presently not in a nebula, and so it is not digesting  much 

matter  at the moment, but if you look at stars in these nebulae,  you 

will see that they are in a highly energetic state.

I  suggest that this is due to the infalling matter which excites  the 

surface  of these suns. Many astronomers believe that the high  energy 

state of suns in nebulae is due to their youth, and they point to  the 

Hurtzsprung-Russell diagram as the proof of this.

The  Hurtzsprung-Russell  diagram plots stars on a chart in  order  of 

their magnitude and temperature, and it is believed that this tells us 

something about the evolution of stars.

Can  we rely on such a diagram for evolutionary information?  Consider 

this little story:

An  umpire  is  standing in a crowded stadium. Upon  his  nose  is  an 

intelligent  wart. This wart desires to know the process of  evolution 

of its host, namely the umpire. In order to aid itself in this  quest, 

the  wart observes the other people in the stadium. Although the  wart 

cannot  see,  it is able to monitor heartbeats and blood  pressure  of 

people present. 

Armed with this information, the wart constructs a graph upon which it 

places  the rate of hart beat and blood pressure of all the people  in 

the stadium.

The  wart  now mistakenly believes that by comparing  people  in  this 

manner, it has acquired a system that displays a sequence of evolution 

from youth to old age.

In  reality,  the  graph  displays  no  such  information;  it  merely 

describes  the  momentary  state of excitement of the  people  in  the 

stadium. The same is true for stars in nebulae. Stars of any age  burn 

hotter and brighter while feeding.

CONCLUSION

In 1979 I stayed in Chicago with a friend who had been kind enough  to 

give me lodging while I was organizing an exhibition of my artwork.

One  evening,  after a particularly strenuous day I took a  long  lazy 

soak in the bath. By chance I grabbed up an astronomy periodical which 

lay atop a stack of magazines which happened to contain pictures taken 

by the Voyager spacecraft which had recently passed through the Jovian 

system.  Those images held me transfixed for hours, and the tub  water 

was quite cold when I emerged from its primordial soup.

Eight  years  later and after considerable reflection I  still  cannot 

dissect,  much  less   put into any coherent  order  of  thought,  the 

process that led to the chrysalis which formed in my mind; I can  only 

offer its fruits. 

These writings are an attempt to put the essence of that vision into a 

semblance of order. 

In  the process of writing this paper I have come to realize  that  we 

live in an outrageously animated universe where nature's ingenuity  is 

law. Within this cosm, no cohesive entity is allowed existence  unless 

the   efficiency  of its structure  has  undergone  nature's  rigorous 

trials.

If suns feed through the manipulation of electromagnetism and gravity, 

it  would seem reasonable to assume that they would do so in the  most 

efficient way possible.

Consider  natures  'invention' of the strawberry flower.  This  is  an 

efficient  device which allows for pollination and fruit.  Pollination 

assures reproduction. The fruit which are derived from the  pollinated 

flower  are specifically designed for the survival of  its  offspring. 

The  seeds  that are imbedded on the surface of  the  strawberry  pass 

unharmed  through  the  animal  digestive  system.  In  this  way  the 

offspring are deposited in a rich compost, away from the parent  plant 

thereby avoiding competition.

I  propose that it is the nature of suns exhibit the same  measure  of 

ingenuity.

In  space, mass is scarce and suns will have evolved in such a way  as 

to take the greatest advantage of the mass that is available to  them. 

Mass  - from which gravity and electromagnetism are derived - are  the 

tools  with which suns seek their fuel. If suns can induce  gravity  - 

make  more  gravity than the corresponding quantity of mass  allows  - 

then they will have sought a way to do so, for it is the nature of all 

life-forms to seek an excellence of efficiency. 

The  life-urge is a universal and little-understood force; it  is  the 

common thread which holds the microcosm to the macrocosm. 

I  think  it  unlikely that this thin sheath we call  a  biosphere  is 

unique  in its essence; if we only choose to see, then  manifestations 

of  life  are to be found on all scales of the cosm.  Seasons  repeat, 

galaxies spin,  atoms oscillate. 

Mankind  is often fooled into thinking of consistency as inanimate;  a 

cup seems to be a cup from moment to moment, but why should it be  the 

same cup? Is there any particular reason why we should believe an atom 

is the same atom after each oscillation? 

Can  we  maintain  that a forest is the same  forest  from  season  to 

season? 

Nor is the consistency of an ocean's color a result of the  inanimate; 

on the contrary, its color is a celebration of life. The  'unchanging' 

appearance  of an oceans color and hue is net result of the  countless 

micro-organisms in the process of living within its water. 

Why  is  it so hard for us as humans to see and  comprehend  a  living 

universe?

In  our shells of being, we are trapped in our own time notion and  it 

is  only  through  insight, patience and study  that  the  actions  of 

smaller and larger cosms come to life for us.

Humankind must resist falling prey to the vanity of uniqueness. 

The  sum of our species has shown no more self determination than  any 

other  species;  we mindlessly extract trapped carbon in the  form  of 

coal and oil and eject it into the Earths atmosphere. 

Is there purpose in this? 

How would we know if we refuse to even consider the Earth as a  living 

entity  of which we are an interacting part? We hurtle along,  blinded 

by our lack of humility; if we refuse look about us in the midst of  a 

living  universe,  how will we know oblivion even if we  were  rushing 

directly towards it?

I   suspect  that the vast majority of copies of this  paper  will  be 

thrown  away without even being read. Some will be  casually   browsed 

through before they are discarded. However, through the sheer force of 

their  numbers  it  is quite possible that a few - such  as  you  dear 

reader -  will actually have read the paper in its entirety. 

I  fancy someday, someone will be tempted to perform  the  occultation 

experiment  which  I have described earlier in this paper.  I  suspect 

that  this  will happen sooner or later anyway, and If  my  vision  is 

false,  and  neutrinos pass through the Sun unimpeded, then  surely  I 

have hurt or offended no one. 

However, if it holds the seeds of truth - that gravity is no slave  to 

matter  - where lie the limits of humankind's destiny, if we learn  to 

understand and control the nature of its force?

It  is  quite possible that no one will remember  my  prediction  when 

verified,  but that is of no consequence. The origin of an idea is  of 

no  importance;  time  bleaches  the  pages  of  history,  names   are 

eventually forgotten in the haze of time and no one is remembered  for 

very  long. I suspect Nietzsche is wrong when he writes that the  only 

things remembered are written in blood and stone. Overall,  humankinds 

collective  memory is quite short and so it is only the concepts  that 

become  indispensable and fundamental to the survival of  our  species 

that  ever  remain  through the rise and fall of cultures  and  in  my 

conceit, it is here that I stake my claim.

Man  has no time but that river of dreams upon which he casts  himself 

adrift.

If  you have any questions or comments, please direct them to  me  at: 

Stephen  Goodfellow, 146 Farrand Park, Highland Park, MI 48023 

(313) 883-4827

CREDITS

I would like to thank the following people who have taken the time  to 

correspond  or  talk with me. Walter Kauppila,  Physics  Professor  at 

Wayne State University. Dr. Favro, W.S.U. Professor Chen, Professor of 

astronomy,  W.S.U. Professor Teske, Physics, University  of  Michigan. 

Jim  Thele, Electrical Technician at G.M. Greg Menovick,  Mathematics, 

W.S.U.  Professor Wadehra, University of Michigan.  Professor  Cowley, 

Physics  &  Astronomy, Wayne State University.  Greenberg,  Editor  of 

Kronos  Journal. Leslie Leifer, Chemistry, Mich. Tech,  Univ.  Special 

thanks to Dr. Raymond Davis of Brookhaven National Laboratory for  his 

research. 

Thanks  to  my  Brother, Justin Meilgaard, for helping  me  with  this 

pamphlet.  I  also thank Bill Haus, Allan  Franklin,  Ralph  Franklin, 

Janis  Lewitt, Dennis Lamberis, Jackie Jablonski, for teaching me  how 

to think. Special thanks to Lowell Boileau and Marvin Reili to whom  I 

owe  the existence of this paper, and who have taken the brunt  of  my 

'off the wall' ideas with immeasurable patience. 

REFERENCES

(1)  "Gravity" by George Gamow, Doubleday Publishers 1962, p.138

(2)  "Realm of the Universe" by George O. Abell, Saunders Pub.  1980. 

     pp.285-86

(3)  The concept of neutrinos passing through the Sun is confirmed  by 

     conversation with  Professor Wadehra from University of Michigan, 

     dept. of Astrophysics (1/21/85) Prof. Wadehra also agreed that it 

     is  hypothetically  possible to determine: (a) The  source  of  a      

     neutrino;  the angle of neutrino approach  can  be determined  by 

     collision,  and (b) A neutrino's energy level can be  determined. 

     (Hence  a solar neutrino cannot be mistaken for a neutrino  of  a 

     higher  energy  even though it originates from a  star  which  is 

     occulted by the Sun.)

(4)  See "Sun," Encyclopedia Britannica, 1980, vol.17, p.178.

(5)  Encyclopedia  Britannica,  "Science and the  Future"  Year  Book, 

     1983; 'The phantom Neutrino' by James S. Trefil, p.224

(6)  News Notes, Sky & Telescope December issue, 1984 p.506                   

(7)  "Sunspots"  1979  by  R.  J. Bray  and  R.  E.  Loughhead.  Dover 

     Publications,p.4. 

(8)   "Sensitive Chaos" by Theodor Schwenk, Schocken Books, New  York, 

     1978 ; pp.44-45.

(9)  "The Key to the Universe" 1978 by Nigel Calder. Penguin Pub.  New      

     York, p.26.

     "Astrophysical  Quantities"  1973  by C.W.  Allen,  3rd  ed.  The      

     Athlone Press, Univ. of London; p.265.  

(10) "Solid Clues" 1985 by Gerald Feinburg, Simon & Schuster pub. p.23 

(11) "The ABC of Plasma" Fusion Magazine, by Riemannian, Nov. 1978

(12) "Dictionary of Science" 1986 Barnhart Books, p.502  

(13) "The ABC of Plasma" Fusion Magazine, by Riemannian, Nov.1978p.42.

(14) "Realm  of  the Universe"1980 by     George  O.  Abell,  Saunders      

     Publication p.222 

(15) "Design  of  the Universe" by Fritz Kahn, Klein  Publishers,  New      

     York 1954 pp. 207-208.

(16) Scientific American, Sept. 1985 "Helioseismology" (Article,) John      

     W.  Leibacher,  Robers W. Noyes, Juri Toomre,  Roger  K.  Ulrich;      

     p.48-57.

(17) "A New Sun" by John A. Eddy, NASA 1979 (SP-402); p.27.

(18) See (15); p.56.

(19) Encyclopedia  Britannica 1980 vol.5, 'Ear,'pp.  1120-1131.  Also:      

     "The Body" 1985 Anthony Smith, Pelican Books, 'The Ear.'

(20) Encyclopedia  Britannica  1980 vol.1,  'Heavier-than-air  craft,'      

     pp.372-383  

(21) "Gravity" by George Gamow, Doubleday      Publishers 1962, p.118

(22) Encyclopedia  Britannica 1980 vol. 9, 'Hurricanes  and  Typhoons'      

     p.63

     Scientific  American  1964  vol.211,  'Experiments  in  Hurricane 

     Modification' by R.H. Simpson and Joanne S. Malkus, pp.27-37

(23) "Principles of Cosmology" 1978, by Michael Berry, Cambridge Univ.      

     Press, London; p.17.