One of the tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a brutal gang of facts.




IT HAS LONG been known that the earth rotates on its Axis of Figure.


Astronomers throughout the ages have observed this rotation, as well as the periodic diversions from regularity, wobbling and precession, and they have calculated the frequency of revolution to a high degree of mathematical accuracy. But this computation alone does not scientifically account for the rotation of the earth. We must also identify the source of energy that causes the earth’s rotation.


This identification, only recently discovered, also provides an understanding of the nature of gravity and gives scientific validity to the theory that polar ice caps, when they grow oversize, cause successive roll arounds of the globe.

We find that the cause of the earth’s rotation is the all pervading force of nature known as celestial radiant energy. The electrical energy rays from celestial space, shot out by countless billions of stars (suns), collide with the earth, are absorbed by it and create its materials. These celestial energy rays create the phenomena of weight and, striking unevenly, cause the earth to rotate.

This section will undertake to demonstrate that the phenomenon of weight is caused by celestial electrical radiation impinging upon, penetrating, and being absorbed by the earth’s materials, and that the cause of terrestrial gravitation is the simple basic phenomenon of dynamic electrical repulsion. Gravitation is to be considered here as an electrical phenomenon!




THE CURRENTLY prevailing theory of "Universal mutual attraction of masses" will be shown to be:

1. refuted by the observable motions of celestial bodies, falling bodies, and other phenomena
2. based on unproven assumptions
3. unsupported by satisfactory repetitive physical proofs

The Drag of Gravity theory will be presented and supported by the citation of numerous physical evidences supporting gravitational repulsion, and specific evidences of:

1. the existence of celestial electrical rays
2. the forces of rays
3. the penetrating powers of rays
4. the ability of materials to stop rays

Just as our pioneer forefathers had to clear the ground before planting their sustenance crops, so it is necessary to clear away the fallacies of the prevailing theory of attraction of masses, now universally taught in our schools. The statements refuting the theory of attraction of masses and those supporting the Drag of Gravity theory are therefore assembled together.

A venerable and generally respected academic theory states that "bodies attract each other directly in proportion to their masses, and inversely in proportion to the square of the distances apart." This theory of "innate attraction" does not bold up against an abundance of factual evidence to the contrary.

The mass of a body does not influence its falling speed. All bodies, large and small, fall to the earth at the same rate of speed. This was first proved by Galileo, and was recently confirmed by scientists at Princeton University. In a vacuum, a feather and a bullet fall at the same speed.

The square of the distance has no relation to the speed of a falling body. The speed of a falling body is not increased by a factor of sixteen at one quarter the distance to the earth; it does increase at a fixed rate of approximately 32.2 feet per second during each and every consecutive second of its fall.

The irony of this refutation of "Newton’s Law of Gravitation" can best be seen by reconsidering Newton’s own statements.

Newton’s First Law of Motion states:

"A body at rest or motion will continue in a state of rest or motion unless acted upon by some outside force."

This Law of Motion would be untrue if bodies possessed inherent powers of attracting other bodies; so-called innate attraction is not an outside force. Hence, this law specifically eliminates any innate gravitational force in material bodies themselves.

In his Principia Newton carefully defined the word "attraction" to mean either attraction or repulsion.


He wrote that he used the word "attraction" to signify any force by which bodies tend toward one another, whatsoever be the cause.

"I here use the word attraction in general for any endeavor whatever made by bodies to approach each other; whether that endeavor arise from the action of the bodies themselves as tending mutually to, or agitating each other by spirits emitted; or whether it arises from the action of the ether or of the air or of any medium whatever, whether corporeal or incorporeal, any how impelling bodies placed therein toward each other."

Newton foresaw the misunderstanding that would develop from his simplification of terminology, and specifically attempted to disassociate himself from an oversimplification of his own views:

"I desire that you would not attribute innate gravity to me... that gravity should be innate... is to me so great an absurdity... that no competent thinker can fall into it".

(quoted by P.E.B. Jourdain in Monist, Vol. 25, 1915, page 252)

And, again, he wrote:

"You sometimes speak of gravity as essential and inherent in matter. Pray do not ascribe that notion to me; for the cause of gravity, I do not pretend to know."

These quotations from Newton’s letters have been published by others, as well as by Jourdain, who was a professor at Cambridge where Newton also lectured. They need no further validation. But they do bring us face to face with having to determine what is fact and what is fiction in present day academic concepts of gravitation.


Newton evidently judged others by his own competence as a thinker, and it now appears that he was over complimentary to many of the savants of the day.

"If anyone should explain gravity and all its laws by the action of some subtle medium," Newton wrote, "and should show that the motions of the planets and comets are not disturbed by this matter, I should by no means oppose it."

("Subtle medium" is, today, a synonymous term for defining electrical phenomena.)

Since the time of Newton the theory of the universal mutual attraction of masses has been developed by writers from hypothesis to an ostensible fact.


This build up is exposed by the following excerpts from an article on gravitation by R.S. Ball in the 9th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"A body dropped from a point above the surface of the earth always falls in a straight line which is directed toward the center of the earth... The observed facts are therefore explained by the supposition that the earth possesses a power of attraction."


But, in section III he says: "Observations of the most widely different character have combined to show us that this law, which was discovered by Sir Isaac Newton, is true. It is called the Law of Gravitation."

It is apparent that the validity of the theory of gravitation, which Newton left to others to explain, is, to Professor Ball, at first a "supposition" that mass attracts mass; but later on this supposition becomes the LAW OF GRAVITATION.

In the 11th (1910) and 13th (1926) editions of The Encyclopedia Britannica it is clear that the theory of attraction has progressed further. Here it is stated:

"The law of gravitation is unique among the laws of nature, not only in its wide generality, taking the whole universe in its scope, but in the fact that so far as yet known, it is absolutely unmodified by any condition or cause whatever .... The general conclusion from everything we see is that a mass of matter in Australia attracts a mass in London precisely as it would if the earth were not interposed between the two masses."

Writers in encyclopedias, dictionaries, and textbooks have credited Newton with the setting up and establishing of what is now called Newton’s Laws of Gravitation. Thus the belief in the unproven theory that mass attracts mass, with its four unproven assumptions, has grown until it is now generally taught, and regarded as a fact.

Mass teaching is based on individual learning, upon which it depends for corrections, rationalizations, and revisions.

The four assumptions of the Law of Gravitation are:

1. Mass attracts mass
2. There is a gravitational constant for mass
3. The "constant" is constant for all matter
4. The attraction varies inversely as the square of the distance

The Encyclopedia Britannica, 13th (1926) edition, under "Gravitation", states:

"The law of gravitation states that two masses M1 and M2 distant d from each other, are pulled together each with a force GM,M2/dz, where G is a constant for all kinds of matter, the Gravitation Constant. The acceleration of M.. toward M1 or the force exerted on it by M1 per unit of mass is therefore GMI/d=. Each pulls the other by a force equal to the number of units of mass multiplied by the constant G."

The "gravitation constant G" is not the acceleration of gravity 32.2 feet per second, known to exist at the earth’s surface, and referred to in physics as "g".


We know that "g" exists with relation to an apple falling to the earth. We know nothing of any force compelling the earth to fall toward the apple, aside from philosophical conjectures.

Physicists have made heroic efforts on the basis of the theory that mass attracts mass. Many experiments have been made during the past one hundred and fifty years in an endeavor to establish a figure for the mean density of the earth. The failure to obtain repetitive duplicate results appears to be the most outstanding fact revealed.


The following is condensed from The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1941, Vol. X, page 663, under "Gravitation:"

"The aim of the experiments to be described here may be regarded either as the determination of the mass of the earth in grams M most conveniently expressed by its mass divided by the volume, that is its mean density A M or the determination of the gravitational constant C. Corresponding to these two aspects of the problem there are two modes of attack.


Suppose that a body of mass m is suspended at the earth’s surface where it is pulled with a force w vertically downwards by the earth m its weight.


At the same time, let it be pulled with a force p by a measurable mass M, which may be a mountain, or some measurable part of the earth’s surface layers, or an artificially prepared mass brought near m, and let the pull of M be the same as if it were concentrated at a distance d.


The earth pull may be regarded as the same as if the earth were all concentrated at the center, distance R.





If, then, we can arrange to observe w/p, we obtain 0, the mean density of the earth."

Here are the figures for this mean density as arrived at by various experimenters also taken from The Encyclopaedia Britannica:



Quito Isle of Inca:
"Bouguer found the density of the earth was 4.7 times that of the plateau a result certainly much too large."

Mount Chimborazo:
"He concluded the earth was 13 times as dense as the mountain a result several times too large . . ."



Schiehallien Mountain:
"Charles Hutton . . . found that the deflection should have been greater . . . arrived at a 'mean density’ of the earth at 4.5, a figure later revised by Playfair."



Mean density of the earth finally resolved at 6.565.



"The values which Von Stemeck obtained for mean density of the earth were not consistent, but increased with the depth of the second station" (depth of the mine).



Cavendish’s Torsion Balance and Modifications

Values Obtained for Delta (mean density of the earth)















5.527 (the only duplicates)



5.527 (the only duplicates)







Experiments based on determining delta by measurements of decrease in weight with increase in distance (elevation above the earth)


Values for Delta

Von Jolly, 1878 81


Poynting, 1878


Richarz and Krigar Menzel, 1884





The acid test of a law of nature is that it will, when properly measured, yield repetitive duplicate results. From the above information it is obvious that the theory of attraction of masses has failed to receive the support of indisputable duplicate repetitive measurements.

It is remarkable that this now venerable theory that mass attracts mass has engaged the conscientious efforts of brilliant physicists, who sensed and believed that they had a truth within their grasp.


The names of these men have come down to us because they stood foremost among their peers. They always knew that their theory required physical proof, and they labored long, diligently, painstakingly to secure convincing proofs. In part they were limited by their lack of knowledge of radio broadcasting and communications, of radar or of electronics, which are at the recently conquered frontiers of knowledge and which constitute a young, vigorous and revolutionary department of science.


(Indeed, the first of the above named experimenters was actually measuring the shielding effects of mountain masses to radiant energy, and not the "pull" of the materials.)


Yet, as is often the case in scientific investigation, the tools of discovery were only just becoming available.

It is an interesting coincidence that the theory of the attraction of masses began to be developed at about the time that the attraction and repulsion of electrically charged conducting bodies were being studied by scientists.


It may also be a coincidence that some of those scientists thought the electrified conducting bodies attracted and repelled each other, failing to consider the possibility that the bodies did not themselves attract and repel, but that they merely hold electrical charges which cause the ether to move them about as explained elsewhere in this book. ("Static Electricity," page 192).


Yet, in the measurements of attraction and repulsion of electrically charged conducting bodies, the same results are always obtainable under the same conditions repetitive duplicate results which meet the acid test of proof of a true law of nature. This fact, which earlier scientists failed to apply to their concepts of gravity, is an integral part of the theory of gravitational repulsion based on celestial radiant energy.

Indeed, proofs are as lacking for the universal attraction of masses as they are abundant for electrical attractions and repulsions.


The force of the assumed gravitational "pull" based on the so called gravitational constant for all matter, G, has never been measured in dynes of force or pounds pull. The Drag of Gravity is measured directly in pounds of weight for any material. By analyses and deductions with observable data, the Drag of Gravity theory has been proved entirely consistent, and the forces of nature, indicated as governing its operations, are now identified.


Quantitative measurements are lacking; but these should be produced reasonably soon. Empirical measurements in aid of the advancement of science are natural functional operations of endowed research organizations, of the thesis and postgraduate work of universities, and of industrial laboratories and others possessing the necessary skills and facilities.


Time, effort, and the evolutionary development of scientific techniques are the only requirements.




To LIMIT A refutation of the theory of attraction of masses to but scant empirical data would be inadequate to sustain such refutation.


But the absence of physical proof is buttressed by the theory’s own inconsistencies and theoretical inadequacy to explain observable phenomena.

The first refutation lies in the fact that the earth does not attract meteors, and is based on elementary observation. The records slow that meteors strike the earth haphazardly at all angles, while others approach very close to the earth and pass by without hitting it. This clearly indicates that the meteors are not being attracted by the earth according to the theory of mutual attraction.


On the other hand, if mass attracts mass directly in proportion to the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance between the masses, then the earth would not only attract shooting stars but all meteors would be attracted in virtually a "bee line" straight toward the center of the earth and would all strike roughly perpendicularly to the earth’s surface.

The fact that meteors are not attracted in this manner makes it clear that the mass of the earth does not attract the mass of shooting stars, and that therefore, in this special case, mass does not attract mass.


However, due to the shielding effect of the earth in regard to radiant energy coming from the opposite direction, slight deflections of meteors toward the earth are observable especially as they get near the earth. (See page 170. )



FIG. 7.

Meteors strike the earth haphazardly at all angles.

They do not come directly toward the center of the earth and do not strike perpendicularly to its surface;

this shows that they are not being pulled by the mass of the earth toward its center.


The second refutation of the universal mutual attraction of masses is based on the elementary fact that the acceleration of gravity is roughly a constant, approximately 32.2 feet per second for each and every consecutive second while a body is falling at or near the earth’s surface.

If mass attracts mass directly as the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance, the acceleration of gravity would not be a constant; but the speed of falling bodies would be accelerated in a geometrical ratio as they approached the earth in response to a constantly increasing "pull’ of gravity.


The gravitational pulls would, for example, be four times as great at one half of the distance and nine times as great at one third of the distance between the falling body and the earth.

The speed of the falling body would respond to the intensity of the pulling force just as the initial speed of a bullet responds to the intensity of the driving force. It is clear that a different driving force produces a different speed. It is equally clear that a geometrically increasing pulling force must produce a geometrically increasing acceleration of gravity, and that this must occur automatically with decreases in distance.


If this is not a physical reality, the theory that every particle in the universe attracts every other particle, and that the pull is inversely as the square of the distance, is proved to be untrue. Hence, because the acceleration of gravity is a constant, it is a fact, proved by tests of many observations, that mass does not attract mass inversely as the square of the distance.

FIG 8.

The acceleration of gravity is a constant. The speed of a bomb dropped by an airplane increases at the steady rate of 32.2 feet per second for each second of its fall. The speed of its fall is not increased faster than the steady rate of increment as it nears the earth. There is therefore no such thing as a pulling power varying inversely as the squares of the distances between earth and bomb. The earth does not "grab," like a magnet, as distances are decreased.

The third refutation of the universal mutual attraction of masses and of the theory that the attraction increases directly as the product of the masses, is based on empirical tests of falling bodies.


Galileo, in the seventeenth century, dropped weights from the Leaning Tower of Pisa and announced the discovery that a one pound weight fell to the earth at the same speed as a ten pound weight of the same material.


His experiments proved that a large mass did not fall faster than a small mass. This was a proof that the so called "attraction" did not vary directly as the mass.


Others have made similar experiments that support Galileo’s tests under different circumstances, and with greater mathematical accuracy. In ballistics a cannon ball and a rifle bullet follow the same trajectories, with modifications for air resistance, showing that both fall to the earth at the same rates of speed.

In the case of bodies falling to the earth, the facts known to science, therefore, refute the theory of attraction of masses directly as the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance between them!

A currently accepted explanation under the universal mutual attraction of masses theory, that helps to account for constancy of constant G near the earth’s surface, says that we must consider the gravitational "pull" of the earth mass as if it were all concentrated at the center of the earth.


This explanation seems to be an additional theory invented to support the original erroneous theory; since it denies the attraction of mass for mass on the surface of the earth, the result is a denial of the theory of the universal mutual attraction of masses.

If gravitation were an attraction between masses, then there would be a difference in weights of bodies on the surface of the earth at noon and midnight, for the reason that the centrifugal force of the earth, due to the rotation of the earth on its axis, is tending to throw materials toward the sun at noon and away from the sun at midnight.


This centrifugal force exists.


It requires a correction of ship’s clock pendulums when moving toward or away from the Equator which is equivalent to stating that a given piece of material actually weighs less at the Equator than at the North Pole or the South Pole.


Further, if the assumed attraction of the sun existed, then its force combined with the existing centrifugal force of earth materials would show less weight at noon, with the sun overhead, and a greater weight at midnight for any test piece.


Yet no decreases in weights of materials due to the assumed "pull" of either sun or moon, have ever been disclosed to exist. The facts once more indicate that no attraction exists between objects on earth and the sun or moon.

The currently prevailing explanation of why the heavenly bodies do not coalesce, due to the heretofore assumed mutual attraction of masses, is that the "original forces" act to keep the celestial bodies moving in a straight line and that their constant fall towards each other is counteracted by the inertia due to these "original forces."

The theory of "original forces" (set in motion at the time of creation) is proved erroneous by the extreme variations in the speed of the earth in its orbit around the sun and by the variations in the speed of the moon in its orbit around the earth.

Motions due to inertia cannot change their speeds, except to die down, while the speeds of the earth and of the moon, in their orbits, are variables, becoming faster and slower at regular recurrent intervals.


FIG. 9. The sun exerts no "pull" on a test weight. At noon, with the sun directly overhead, any test weight would weigh less if the sun is pulling on it, while the centrifugal force, due to the earth’s rotation, is tending to throw it toward the sun. No such decrease in weight has been discovered.


If the velocity of a body be increased, the force producing that velocity must have been increased, or the resistance to its motion decreased. And if the velocity of a body be reduced, the impelling force must have been reduced, or the resistance increased.

The theory of "original forces" is, therefore, without scientific foundation. The alleged forces simply do not exist.


The introduction of the idea of such a force in the attempt to bolster up the theory that mass attracts mass is thus seen to be like a boomerang which returns and destroys the original theory of attraction of masses when the theory of "original forces" is exploded.



FIG. 10. Old theory of why the heavenly bodies do not crash together.

The curved line is the orbit of the planet around the sun, resulting from the combined actions of force TZ and force TS.

The line TZ represents the "original momentum."

The line TS represents the assumed "pull of the sun."

Neither of these forces exists.


A corollary to the refutation of this long held theory is that if masses such as sun, earth and moon are attracting each other, and there is no "original force" of momentum to hold them apart, they would come together quickly. The facts are that they do not come together hence, there is clearly no universal mutual attraction of masses.

As we saw above, The Encyclopaedia Britannica has, in its past editions, given authoritative expression to developments in scientific thought up to the time of publication.

Significantly, however, a change of attitude toward "attraction of masses" is demonstrated by the successive writers.

It is proper to add that the 11th (1910) edition refers only very briefly and by abstract mathematical equations only to the acceleration of planets toward the sun, and of the moon toward the earth.

Both the 13th (1926) edition, and the 1941 printing, skip entirely these items of mutual planetary attraction, and make no attempt to explain away the failure of the sun and earth and moon to crash together due to the law of universal mutual attraction of masses. This suggests a trend of scientific thought away from the older theories, but does not indicate what new theory is to supplant the old.



As we have seen, Sir Isaac Newton was strictly neutral as to whether gravitation involved a pull or a push.


He was careful to explain that he made use of the word "attraction" between masses to mean either attraction or repulsion, or any means whatsoever impelling bodies toward each other. He wrote that he would not oppose an explanation of gravitation which laid the cause to some subtle medium, provided it did not contradict astronomical observations.

As suggested earlier, the explanation offered here is that electrical energy is the subtle medium whose identification Sir Isaac said he would not oppose as being the cause of gravitation. This energy is found to occur as both dynamic and static electricity. In its dynamic form, known as radiant energy, it is being broadcast from celestial bodies, causing gravitation and the weight of materials.


In its static form it holds the heavenly bodies apart, preventing cosmic collisions, since all celestial bodies possess the same kind of electrical charges on their surfaces and thus repel each other rather than collide, as they would do if they were all attracting each other by some inherent force or pull.

The theory of gravitation by radiant energy is not new. The earliest reference is that made by LeSage, of Geneva, who explained that "ultramundane corpuscles" in space impinged on the bodies in space and caused gravitation. (journal des Savants, 1764)

The Dutch physicist Lorentz (1853 1928) has stated that,

"The theory of LeSage can be saved by assuming the corpuscles are wholly or partially absorbed by matter, but then the picture is deprived of its simplicity."

(Lectures on Theoretical Physics, by Hendrik A. Lorentz, translated into English, Vol. 1, page 153, Macmillan Co., 1927) .

This appears to be a prophetic forecast of what is now disclosed as the absorption of energy in creating earth materials and as the cause of gravitation and the Drag of Gravity.

In his book The Copernican Revolution, Thomas S. Kuhn explains the genesis of the prevailing theory of mutual attraction of masses. On pages 252 62 he states:

"The French scientist Descartes (1596 1650) said, loose bodies are driven to the earth by the impacts of aerial corpuscles in the earth centered vortex".

That became an accepted belief at that time. Newton agreed with Descartes (Newton, Optiks, 4th edition, 1730, N.Y., Dover, 1952, page 401).

"Again and again Newton insisted that gravity was not innate in matter. In spite of his specific intention Newton led most of his successors to believe that gravity, and therefore weights, were intrinsic properties of matter."

Cotes, who translated Newton’s work from the original Latin, did more than anyone else to establish the present concept of mutual attraction of masses.

"It was forty years (of battling) before Newtonian physics firmly supplanted Cartesian physics. Though forced at last to admit his defeat, he (Newton) continued to maintain that someone else would succeed."

Charles F. Johnson, of Trinity College, has published a pamphlet entitled "Gravity Not an Attraction" (1925 ), in which he states:

"The assumption or hypothesis is that all space is full of a force acting in straight lines in every direction on matter. Like magnetic attraction, it is not perceptible to our senses, but, unlike magnetic attraction, it is not increased at short distances.


This force penetrates all material bodies. Unlike light, nothing is opaque to it and nothing is transparent. In passing through matter, it parts with a proportion of its energy proportional to the mass or density. It is of the nature of pressure, but unlike the pressure of an elastic fluid, it is not reflected and acts in straight lines only.


It would force a yielding mass into a spherical form. It strikes the earth on all sides equally, but in penetrating the earth it loses with every foot a part of its energy... It beats down on the surface of the earth with millions of pounds to the square foot sufficient to amount on the entire surface to the weight of the earth... But the energy comes from an illimitable source space.


The universe being regarded primarily as a universe of force and not of matter."

Professor Johnson made the first mechanical device for detecting variations in the quantity of electrical radiant energy from space, at a given location, by measuring the relative amounts of incoming rays being shut off on the side toward a mountain as compared to the side toward the sea.

In The Ether Stream (1921), J. S. Miller of England states:

"Ponderable substances are known through our senses. They can be weighed and measured. Imponderable substances are known to us only through their action on ponderable substances. They have no weight. The ether is chief [imponderable]... If imponderable substances can act on and move ponderable substances, then ponderable substances must react to imponderable substances in order to maintain the natural law of action equaling reaction, or equilibrium...


A stone, then, falls to the earth because the ether stream is rushing through it at a great velocity on its way into the earth, and by its frictional force carries the stone to the earth with it... The stone has no reciprocal power to draw the earth to itself. . . :’

A paper entitled "A Kinetic Theory of Gravitation" was read before the American Association for the Advancement of Science by Charles F. Brush in December 1910. He stated,

"I believe that kinetic energy of the ether is the fundamental cause of gravitation:" He quoted Sir J. J. Thompson as saying, "All kinetic energy is energy of the ether", and he quoted Sir Oliver Lodge as saying "All potential energy exists in the ether." He continued, "As is well known, the ether waves of light will exert a slight pressure on a body."

He called to mind a large chamber with uniformly lighted walls, in which two opaque bodies are suspended, and stated,

"Each body will be partially shielded by the other body from the ether waves coming from that direction. Hence the light pressures will be less on that side of each body which faces toward the other than on the side which is turned away".

He differentiated between light waves which cause heating and the longer ether waves that do not excite molecular vibrations; and lie explained gravitation as a push rather than a pull.

Dr. Brush delivered a lecture on gravitation, in April 1929, before the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia (Vol. LXV1113 1929), in which he gave the results of experiments confirming his statement:

"Conversion into heat of some of the energy of gravitation ether waves, however little, might be expected to impair to some extent the falling velocity of a heat generation substance; and all such substances thus far tested have shown impairment."

He reported and analyzed tests made by him demonstrating that the speeds of acceleration of falling bodies, at the same time and place, were not identical between heat absorbing and non heat absorbing bodies. When some of the energy which caused the speeds of falling, was absorbed by the body itself, then the body fell more slowly.

The above statements were referred to the Gravity Research Foundation of New Boston, New Hampshire, and in reply the president, George M. Rideout, has written me that,

"Dr. Brush’s ideas regarding the gravity effect of heated bodies has been shown by Poynting and Phillips to be less than two parts per million per degree. That is less than the limits of experimental error. Consequently there is no verifiable evidence for Dr. Brush’s Theory."

The above comment states, in effect, that there might be a recognized difference in the speeds of falling bodies of heat absorbing and non heat absorbing materials, but that the difference is too small to detect experimentally. A communication from the National Bureau of Standards states that the effect Dr. Brush proposed has never been verified.

"The Analogy between LeSage’s Theory of Gravitation and The Repulsion of Light" by G. H. Darwin, F.R.S., was read on May 18, 1905 and is recorded in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1905. He treated the subject mathematically and referred to contemporaneous works on repulsion by Poynting and Lord Kelvin.



LOOKING OUT INTO SPACE we see billions of suns radiating energy.


We find that we are in a universe of force and that the earth on which we live is a ball of matter and minor electrical forces reacting to a surrounding universe of electrical forces. It has been estimated that the total radiation into space from the sun alone amounts to 3.79x1033 ergs (of energy) per second in the form of light, heat, and other ethereal vibrations, and that only one part in 120 million hits a planet or star directly.

If we point a telescope into the sky and focus its eyepiece on a selenium cell, or phototube, this "electric eye" will detect and respond to the incoming celestial radiant energy. For the spectacular openings of the Chicago Century of Progress Exposition a phototube was used, while for the opening of the New York Sesquicentennial Celebration a selenium cell was used.


In both cases the telescopes were pointed at the star Arcturus, for sentimental reasons only, and the cells reacted after a fraction of a second’s exposure to the incoming energy rays.

If we attempt to measure in this way the total incoming energy, only guidelines can be given here.


The known factors are sketchy and will require much further research. We know the minimum amount of energy required to operate the photoelectric cell; we do not know what maximum input could be, and our knowledge of the efficiency of the operation of the cell, a factor in the computation of the total amount of received energy, similar to the factor of transparency of the lenses to the wave lengths involved, is limited to our ability to compare the photoelectric cell to other standards.


We know that only a fraction of a second was required to operate the cell; but in our computation we must adjust this figure to the energy received per second, all the while taking into account the specific physical properties of the photocell that manifest themselves in the change from an initial reaction to a pulse of energy and a continued exposure to this energy.

With a known angular field of telescopic lenses, and with a knowledge of the factors just mentioned, it is a matter of simple arithmetic to calculate the total energy that impinges upon the earth per second as a result of the energy vectors received by the telescopic field. By taking various readings of the photoelectric cell at various angles of the telescope to the horizon, a reasonably accurate approximation of the total energy impinging upon the earth from all angles can be developed mathematically.

The minimum amount of radiant energy of wave length 0.8 microns detectable by a selenium cell is about 10 ’2 watts.


Knowing this factor, which is the minimum amount of energy coming through the telescopic lens to make the tube work, and assuming that the average lengths of the radiant energy rays from celestial space is 0.8 microns and the exposure a full second, we find the total calculated incoming daily energy from celestial space to be approximately 2’i billion. B.T.U.’s (British Thermal Units), which is the equivalent of about 2 trillion foot pounds. (The data on energy required to make a selenium cell function were furnished by the National Bureau of Standards.)

The above is an approximation, because of the unknown time element involved. It indicates that the energy from celestial space, calculated as above, is probably a tiny fraction of the total energy received daily by the earth.


Waldemar Kaempffert quotes the work of Dr. Charles G. Abbott of the Smithsonian Institution and states that

"In the deluge of sunshine that inundates the earth every hour there is the energy equivalent of 21 billion tons of coal."

(Explorations in Science, Chapter 14) .

Basing our estimate on coal having 14,000 B.T.U.s per pound, we arrive at an astronomical figure of B.T.U.’s per day: 14,000,000,000,000,000,000.

The relative amounts of electricity received by the earth from the down pouring celestial electrical radiations which cause materials to have weights, and the amounts of electricity received directly from the sun are yet to be evaluated. Light and heat on the surface of this planet are dependent upon the sun. Animal and plant life have heretofore been considered as responding to the sun alone; but, animals and plants grow at night when direct sunlight is absent. Corn is known to grow faster at night. The night blooming cereus opens only at night.

Energies in motion in the form of electrical radiations are forces, and energy rays are corpuscular. Electrical energy radiation from celestial space has photographed itself by striking atoms in the emulsions of photographic films. The pictures produced show the streaks of the incoming cosmic ray particles, and also the streaks of the splashed out fragments, appearing something like a high powered bullet striking a bag of marbles which become scattered by the impact.


The streaks caused by the fragments of the smashed atoms indicate that they become secondary forces in motion before becoming dissipated in the earth or its atmosphere.

The use of the analogy of bullets requires qualification, because the photons, quanta, and the cosmic rays and products are continuously penetrating downward through all animals, without their becoming aware of the existence of the incoming energy radiations. Animals are similarly unconscious of the radio and television radiations which also permeate the ambient atmosphere and pass through them.

The equivalence and interchangeability of matter and energy are clearly indicated by the spectroscopic analysis of materials. When heated to incandescence, all materials broadcast the unique energy rays of their constituent elements in definite segments of the spectrum, corresponding to the energy levels of the electrons within the atomic structure.


Thus, by the use of a standard table of the constant patterns of emission of each element, the chemical structure of any earth material can be positively identified.

This technique indicates that all earth materials are built up of dynamic radiant energy rays which were metamorphosed to concrete materials by animal, vegetable, and mineral growth-a theory fully investigated in Part Three. The change back from materials to radiant energy occurs on heating to incandescence, whereby the materials lose their molecular identities through disintegration and re-association into gaseous molecules that in turn radiate characteristic dynamic energy rays.

Proofs of the interchangeability of energy and matter are the atomic bombs, in which matter changes into energy instantly, and photosynthesis, where energy is slowly converted into the plant materials of the earth.

Because dynamic electrical rays are imponderable substances they can be identified only by the effects they produce on ponderable substances. The oneness of energy, matter, and dynamic electrical radiations is indicated by the "Edison effect" a term used because of his early research and identification of the cause of the lighter colored shadows or lines on the insides of clear glass incandescent light bulbs of the long carbon filament type, in which one leg of the filament intercepted the flow of radiant energy from the other leg.

When energy rays are thus produced and radiated by the incandescent filament in a glass electric light bulb, the existence of a force or energy being emitted is evident. Edison proposed signaling to ships at sea by means of this source of energy power.

Particles, as well as light and heat rays of the incandescent materials, are shot away, and some of these emissions, which are not unlike microscopic shooting stars, are stopped or metamorphosed from energy back to matter and appear on the inside surfaces of the glass bulbs through which the light rays pass.

The materials which appear and build up on the insides of lamp bulbs, when incandescent, were once a part of the filament of the lamps; we thus have the phenomenon of materials changing from matter to radiant energy, or, like meteor dust, passing across a short space from filament to glass, in a vacuum, and a very small part of it reappearing as matter on the insides of the bulbs, when stopped by the glass.

Action and reaction being always equal and opposite in direction, it follows that the glass was subjected to a tiny element of dynamic electrical repulsion, which is something analogous to the dynamic electrical repulsion of the radiant energy rays and meteor dust being continuously poured from incandescent spheres in celestial space upon all elements of the surface of the earth.

As suggested earlier, it is this dynamic electrical energy of celestial rays that is responsible for terrestrial gravitation. Weight is caused by the downward impact and penetration of celestial electrical radiation releasing its energy in the materials with which it collides, and by which it is retarded and eventually stopped.

The materials of the earth are composed of molecules, which in turn are composed of atoms. Atoms differ in their number of positively charged protons, neutral neutrons, and negatively charged electrons. The more each atom possesses of each of these atomic particles, the greater its chances of being struck by incoming energy rays, and hence the heavier its weight. The permeability of atoms of the earth materials to the incoming energy radiations from celestial space determines weight. Weight varies inversely with permeability.

Atoms can be represented as individual entities, resembling the units of our solar system and consisting of a nucleus of protons, charged with positive electricity, with an equal or greater number of neutrons, without electrical charge (except hydrogen), and a number of electrons, equal to the number of the protons and charged with negative electricity, whirling about the nucleus like the planets that revolve around the sun at definite but different distances.

The revolving electrons of the heavy earth elements are assumed to occupy definite zones and revolve in circular orbits about the nucleus. They are not all concentrated along the same orbit around the nucleus. Thus, the heavy element uranium has 92 protons and 146 neutrons in its nucleus, and 92 electrons which are whirling about the nucleus, grouped in definite zones at seven different distances from the nucleus.

The radii of the whirling electrons of the atoms are extremely great in extent compared to the relatively tiny sizes of the in coming radiant energy, hence the chances of a collision with the incoming energy radiations are extremely rare; but every energy atom from celestial space eventually strikes a nucleus or electron of an atom of earth material.


Earth elements, such as uranium, which possesses many protons, neutrons, and electrons, are struck by the incoming rain of energy atoms, much more often than earth elements with fewer such particles; therefore uranium is heavier than an element such as hydrogen, which has only one proton, one electron, and no neutrons.

If the radii are short, or if the atoms are close together, there are more chances of collisions and the atoms will be struck more often by the incoming energy radiations than if the radii were longer and the spaces between the particles greater.

Each different kind of material produces a different stopping power for the electrical radiations, and this stopping power we recognize as its weight. The effect of these forces, coming from all angles and penetrating all material objects near the earth’s surface, is to tend to drag or carry the materials along in the directions of their flows.

The sum total of the actions of all the forces impinging on and penetrating materials and of the reactions of the materials to these forces together with radiations from the earth into space results in a downward component nearly perpendicular to the surface of the earth, or as the surface would be if all mountains and valleys were reduced to a common plane action and reaction being equal and opposite in direction.




FIG. 11.

Common window glass stops the passage of the ultraviolet rays, but permits passage of the light rays.
Quartz glass permits the passage of the ultraviolet rays.


Energy rays of many different wave lengths or frequencies reach the earth from celestial space.


They differ in their effects on earth materials. Window glass stops the ultraviolet light rays but permits all other light rays to pass; this proves that the stopping power of each material varies with the different wave lengths of electrical radiations,

Quartz glass permits the passage of ultraviolet rays but common window glass stops the very same rays; this proves that there is a variation in the stopping powers of different kinds of materials when exposed to electrical radiations of the same wave lengths.

These and similar examples demonstrate conclusively that light rays of different wave lengths possess different penetrating powers, and that a material can stop the light rays of certain wave lengths but will permit energy rays of other wave lengths to pass through it.

These elementary citations indicate fundamentally different and varying reactions between earth materials and the incoming radiant energy rays from celestial space.

Dynamic rays, like bullets, are absorbed through resistance similar to friction, but, unlike bullets, the rays cause no apparent disruption of the materials penetrated. Not the bullet itself, but its force is absorbed by the reactions of materials to its passage through them.

Radiant energy rays are forces in motion; they not only possess force but are synonymous with force; and, because energy is indestructible, these radiant forces are not lost whether emitted from spheres in the celestial heavens or from the materials of the earth.

A radiant energy motor, or radiometer, which demonstrates repulsion is widely sold as a scientific toy. It consists of a small clear glass globe somewhat resembling a large size incandescent lamp bulb in which a vacuum has been created. Four flat vanes are mounted vertically and spaced like the arms of a horizontal windmill, supported on a needle pivoted shaft. One side of each vane is coated black; the other side is white. Black absorbs light and heat radiations; white does not.


The result is that the black sides of the vanes are repelled by the light and heat radiations, which they absorb. The vanes, therefore, revolve on the shaft at speeds proportional to the intensities of the light and heat rays producing a simulation of perpetual motion.

Light rays are today recognized as a medium of energy transmission, similar to an electric current in a circuit, and are being used in the functioning of photoelectric tubes, or "electric eyes," just as microwaves of another wave length are used to transmit communications.

The gamma ray, for example, has a penetrating force like that of a bullet. This force may be measured by the stopping powers of materials; therefore, because action and reaction are always equal and opposite in direction, the force of the gamma ray, its dynamic electrical propulsion, is balanced by and measured by the stopping powers of materials.

The gamma ray penetrates,

1) 22 feet through water, and

2) 2 feet through lead, as reported by Robert A. Millikan, the well-known research physicist.

The specific gravities of water and lead are 1 and 11 respectively; these are the same proportions, but in inverse ratio, that we noted regarding the penetrating power of the gamma ray.

This illustration proves,

1) the power of materials to stop radiant energy rays, and

2) the absorption of rays by materials which limit the penetrating power of the gamma rays.

It associates the power of materials to stop gamma rays with the Drag of Gravity by disclosing the same relative drag by water and lead in the case of gamma rays as well as those incoming rays from celestial space which cause the phenomenon of the weight of materials.

Some of the light rays from the sun penetrate materials while some are stopped by materials. They penetrate water and glass, but are stopped by wood and stone; but if the water is deep enough, or the glass thick enough, the light rays are finally stopped and absorbed.

Experiments by Fizeau and Foucault showed that light rays are slowed down by water, indicating a reaction of the water equal and opposite to the dynamic forces of the energy rays.

Rays from the sun strike our skin and cause sunburn and tan. They are also reported to be able to penetrate our bodies; that light and heat rays can penetrate opaque bodies is indicated by the fact that our internal organs respond to sun baths and toughen at the same time that the skin on the surface of our bodies become tanned.

The theory that celestial electrical radiations impinge on and penetrate matter, causing a downward drag or repulsion of gravity, also assumes that the forces producing the downward drag of gravity are fairly uniform and steady and will cause the acceleration of gravity to follow an arithmetical progression of approximately 32.2 feet per second for each and every consecutive second during which a freely falling body is falling.


Observation supports this theory and positively refutes the prevailing theory of a geometrical progression.

The phenomenon known as weights of materials is produced by the impact of these forces as they collide with and are absorbed by the earth. The relative capacity of each type of material to stop celestial electrical radiations is measured directly in pounds and ounces.

The earth, by stopping and absorbing these energy rays, becomes a shield against the forces coming from the direction of the antipodes. The downward forces predominate at any point on the surface of the earth.

The energy of these bombarding rays is not lost. It is absorbed in the earth by the materials of the earth. Some of the rays are creators of materials, as outlined in Part Three. The impacts of various rays are not absorbed to the same degree by all materials, but are absorbed by each material in proportion to a phenomenon called weights of materials.

Weight measures the power of materials to stop radiations from space. The dynamic energies of the bombarding celestial radiation are converted into weight, by virtue of which the materials are forced toward the approximate center of the earth.

Physical phenomena to be subsequently identified and analyzed show a slight west to east predominance of the incoming radiant energy rays, a fact which causes the globe to rotate from west to east. The position in space of the earth’s Axis of Spin is established by these static and dynamic forces, just as its Axis of Figure is established by the materials of the earth.

The effect of these forces, coming from all angles and penetrating all material objects near the earth’s surface, is to tend to drag or carry the materials along in the direction of their flow.


The sum total of the actions of all these forces, impinging on and penetrating materials, and of the reactions of the materials to these forces, together with radiations from the earth into space, results in a downward component perpendicular to the surface of the earth action and reaction being equal and opposite in direction.

Today atoms are being smashed into atoms by the various high voltage cyclotrons.

Weightlessness is a phenomenon which occurs in space because the celestial energy radiations strike the atoms of the various materials from all directions and therefore neutralize each other; however, at the surface of the earth the impact of the radiations exerts a uniform pressure directed toward the center of the earth, the reason being that the earth itself is interposed as a shield against radiations from the antipodes.

Since one needs physical proof in order to establish the validity of any new theory of science, a review of various examples of recorded and observable evidence follows.

If we could look down from the North Star at the plane of the earth’s orbit, with the sun in its center, we will see that the earth rotates counterclockwise. If it did not rotate as it moves forward along its orbit, it would continually keep a section of its forward left side away from the sun’s rays, while fully exposing a similar section of its rear right side to those radiations.

In this case if bullets were being shot from sun to earth, instead of rays, more bullets would hit on the exposed rear right areas and fewer on the forward left areas that were constantly hidden from the sun’s radiations. Such a situation would aid in producing the existing counterclockwise rotation of the earth and supports the theory of dynamic repulsion by radiant energy, this being a part of the Drag of Gravity theory.


FIG. 12. Assuming that the earth did not rotate!

The orbit of the earth and successive positions of the earth in it are shown, illustrating that the impinging radiations from the sun would tend to force rotation in counterclockwise direction. The earth’s rotation is counterclockwise

In first position the area of the earth ACB is exposed to the repellant rays of the sun, the area ADB is shielded.

In second position the area C to B which was formerly exposed and is now shielded from the direct rays of the sun, while the area A to D which was formerly shielded, is now directly exposed to the push of the repellant rays.


Imponderable forces are pushing everything ponderable from west to east. They force the earth to rotate from west to east.


They cause the ocean waters, the suspended detritus in rivers, the high low barometric pressures, the winds, the atmosphere, thunder storms and freely falling bodies to travel from west to east.

In the study of ocean currents made by `bottle casters" and others it has been found that bottles and other freely floating objects, where not deflected by local winds or currents, drift from west to east. It seems to be obvious that this effect is caused by the west to east push of the incoming rays of radiant energy of dynamic electrical repulsion.

Ocean currents show the effects of the west to east repulsion of radiant energy radiations. The Gulf Stream in the Atlantic Ocean and the Japan Current in the Pacific Ocean are both deflected eastward.

Moreover, the waters of the Pacific Ocean are being pushed against the west coasts of North and South America. The mean ocean level is higher by eight inches on the west coast of Panama, at the entrance to the canal, than on the east coast. In the area of the proposed Nicaragua canal the ocean waters on the Pacific coast are three and a half feet higher than the east coast sea level.

The Pacific Ocean finds relief outlets to the south in the Cape Horn current, flowing from west to east, and to the north through Bering Strait, flowing continuously into the Arctic Ocean.

There is a complex flow of currents in the Strait of Gibraltar, which opens into the Atlantic Ocean, and its eastward flow appears to reflect the west to east push of the Drag of Gravity. "In addition to the normal tidal flow at a maximum of 1’2’ knots extending from surface to bottom, running both ways at 6 hour intervals, there is superimposed an upper current of about 1% knots, flowing from west to east into the Mediterranean Sea, and a west going lower current of slightly lower speed flowing from the east into the Atlantic Ocean:’ (Communication from the British Admiralty.)

High and low barometric pressure areas travel continually around the globe from west to east, at fairly well defined rates of speed, except where local conditions change their speeds and directions. This observable fact requires an explanation, and the rational explanation is the west to east push of radiant energy.

It is known that areas of low barometric pressure concentrate more moisture than areas of high barometric pressure. In such areas, incoming celestial radiations thus have something more to push against. Naturally, therefore, the low areas travel faster than the high.

It is known that both low and high areas travel faster in winter than in summer. This follows naturally, because the particles against which the celestial radiations strike are denser in winter since they are colder, and they therefore receive a greater push from west to east.

The speeds of Lows and Highs in miles per hour in the United States, based on data from the New York City station of the U.S. Weather Bureau, are as follows:



For entire
For 3 winter months For 3 summer months Percent increase
in winter
Average speed of Lows 28.6 mph 34.8 mph 25.4 mph 42%
Average speed of Highs 25.6 mph 28.4 mph 22.7 mph 25%



Lows are rotated counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern hemisphere, the reason being that the incoming west to east radiant energy rays impinge on the moisture particles concentrated in the Lows at more favorable angles on the side toward the Equator, due to the spherical shape of the earth.


The Highs then rotate in opposite directions in re establishing normal pressures.

The positions of the stars overhead may affect the latitudes at which the Lows and Highs travel from west to east; they thus may have an effect on our local weather. As the earth travels through space, slight variations in the intensities of the radiant energy pouring in from celestial space results from the relative positions of the stars above and may cause the Lows and Highs to travel at lower or higher latitudes.

The records of ancient history show that men have instinctively looked to the stars and their positions in the heavens as exerting some effect on global life.

Large masses of summer clouds known as "thunderheads" grow bigger while moving slowly in a sideways direction. But once they begin to precipitate rain, they move from west to east at fairly well defined rates of speed. This movement of freely suspended collections of electrically bound moisture particles, which the clouds are precipitating as rain, is caused by the west to east push of the incoming radiant energy rays.

The United States Weather Bureau advises:

"In general, in middle latitudes (in both hemispheres), thunderstorms usually move from a westerly direction. The direction of movement is usually determined by the larger scale flow, in which the thunderstorm cell is imbedded."

It is well known that there is a "Great West Wind" encircling the earth at a high altitude. Dust from volcanoes has been known to go round the world, from west to east, the driving force being the incoming rays of radiant energy.

Incendiary balloons launched by the Japanese during World War 11 brought these high altitude west winds to public attention. The balloons had control devices to keep them flying at altitudes of 30,000 to 35,000 feet, at which they would drift toward America in the west to east air currents; the speeds of these air currents have since been clocked by radar equipped balloons at 450 miles per hour.

The Mississippi and Rhone Rivers both flow southward. Their deltas are deflected to the east because of the west to east push of incoming radiant energy.

Rivers in the northern hemisphere have been found to erode their west banks. They have a tendency to fill toward the east banks, due to suspended detritus being pushed eastward by the west to east radiant energy rays and the westerly winds which they induce. The Hudson River at New York City, for example, requires dredging toward the Manhattan side more often than toward the New Jersey side.

The wobble of the earth is caused by the same forces that cause its rotation. The earth is being continually assaulted by photons, quanta, cosmic rays, and meteor dust. Since there is a greater quantity coming from the west than from the east, there is a west to east rotation of the globe. As the earth rushes through space, being a part of the whole solar system, the angles at which these radiant energy rays strike the earth vary by minuscule amounts and bring about changes in the position in space of the Axis of Spin, or the true axis of the earth.


The gyroscopic effect of the centrifugal force of the stabilizing bulge of the earth causes the Axis of Figure to adjust itself to the changed position of the true axis and is the cause of the wobble.

A theoretical question: "Do falling bodies move southward " has been the subject of numerous experiments.


The theory is that the earth, being bulged at the Equator and also because of the assumed universal mutual attraction of masses theory should offer greater "pull" in a southerly direction on bodies falling freely in the northern hemisphere. One phenomenon noted in all the reports that I have examined is to the effect that an east ward deflection of the falling bodies has always been found.


This eastward deflection could be produced by either or both of two causes:

  • The momentum imparted to the body by the faster speed when at high altitude, the object then being farther from the center of the rotating earth, or

  • It could be caused by the west to east push on the body by incoming radiant energy rays.

The southward deflection is naturally accounted for by the Drag of Gravity: the shielding effect against the radiant energy coming from the direction of the bulge of the earth, to the south, is sizable compared to the lack of shielding against the energy radiations coming from the north.



STATIC ELECTRICITY differs from dynamic electricity in the manifestations or ways in which it makes its presence known to us. It is the invisible force which keeps the heavenly bodies apart, prevents their collisions, and causes the tides of the oceans.

Static electrical repulsion is one of the forces of nature discovered by experiments on the surface of the earth. Like dynamic celestial radiation, static electricity is one of the prime underlying forces controlling and determining the phenomena commonly attributed to innate attraction.


Whereas gravitation has been erroneously construed as an inherent property of masses, it is now explained accurately as resulting from the forces of celestial static and dynamic radiations, and from the interplay of dynamic radiation on materials within the environmental forces and the positions of bodies in space determined by the forces of static electricity.

On a cosmic level, the earth itself is a conducting sphere which is being continuously charged electrically. The relative amounts of the electric charge vary, causing variations in the earth currents, which at times and places interrupt grounded telephonic and telegraphic communications. Variations in earth currents are caused by changes in electric potentials, clearly coming from without and not from within the earth.

The earth is continuously receiving electrical charges in the form of celestial radiations from untold billions of incandescent spheres. It is at the same time discharging electricity into space.

This system is balanced so nicely that, at its rate of discharge, it would be completely discharged in 7;2 minutes, if it were not being constantly recharged from without. (See Physics of the Air, by W.J. Humphreys.) The sum total of the outgoing conduction currents, continually flowing away from the earth, like a cataract always falling but never running dry, is balanced by the incoming flow of celestial electrical radiations, which always leaves the earth with approximately the same average charge.

Electricity flows only in closed circuits from points of higher to lower potentials. All that is lost in any circuit is the potential. The flow of electrical energy from celestial space to the earth, and from the earth into space, is necessarily in closed circuits.

It has been known for a long time that there is a steady flow of electricity from the earth into space. There has been a recognized gap in the science of physics, a gap which requires an explanation of how the electricity arrives in the earth. The theory of a celestial radiant energy that produces gravitation, rotation, and build up of the earth, now fills that gap. It supplies the missing element required to complete the theory of an electrically radiating earth.

This theory requires not only recognition of the incoming electrical radiations as a fact but it also accounts for the long recognized outgoing electric currents. It also explains the presence of excess radiant energy, according to the formula E mc2, which may be written m E/c2 and now may be modified to m E/c, as explained later in Part Three of this book. In these equations m equals the mass added to the earth’s materials, E is incoming radiant energy, and c is the speed of light.


This excess radiant energy is continuously building up the top stratum of the surface of the earth with new materials, as explained in Part Three, "Origin of the Earth’s Materials."

One of the fundamental tenets of the Drag of Gravity theory holds that the surface of the earth contains a quantity of electricity known as static electricity. Yet, since any conducting body on the earth’s surface, charged with like electricity and separated from contact with the earth, would tend to be repelled at once, it becomes evident that the Drag of Gravity is a tremendously greater force than the force of electrical repulsion.


The forces of the incoming radiations are so powerful that the forces of electrical repulsion seem to become infinitesimal. The Drag of Gravity ti ,us appears to produce a binding force on the atoms of the earth’s materials.

As an analogy, let us consider the structure of the atom. The nuclei of the atoms are understood to be composed of protons, all of which are electrically positive and which ought, therefore, to forcibly repel one another. But a binding force greater than the force of electrical repulsionwelds the protons and the neutrons of the atoms into a single stable kernel.

Ever since the Brownian movement of molecules was discovered it has been known that molecules are in constant motion in liquids and gases and that they bump against one another.


The positive protons and negative electrons in atoms and molecules are electrical entities that revolve and spin, and they thus create electrical currents with coexisting magnetic fields; fields of various neighboring particles merge, the consequence being that all atoms and molecules are characterized by a pattern of interacting magnetic forces. The primary forces producing these motions and effects are the incoming radiant energy rays which strike them.


The outmoded Attraction of Gravity theory cannot account for these motions.



FIG. 13.

Static attraction and repulsion of electrically charged conducting bodies.

Two insulated balls are both charged with the same kind of electricity either positive or negative electricity.

The tensions along the lines of force now tend to push the electrifications on the surfaces away from each other,

decreasing the electrical charges on the near sides and increasing the electrical charges on the far sides.

Bv opposing each other on the near sides a super saturated condition of the intervening medium is created

which pushes the balls apart.

Physical experiments show that insulated spheres, being electrical conductors, have the ability fo retain charges of electricity subject to slow leakage into the surrounding atmospheric medium.


The charges reside solely in the outer surfaces of the spheres, whether the spheres be solids or hollow shells. The electrical charges may be imparted to the spheres by contact with another electrified body, or by "influence" of a relatively close electrically charged body which does not touch it. An insulated conducting body has not only the property of holding a charge of electricity, but when charged it fairly bristles with electricity. We cannot see this "bristling," but we can measure the relative amounts of the electric charge at different distances.

We observe that two bodies charged with like electricity repel each other.


The fact is, however, that the force of repulsion is in the intervening medium and is not an inherent property of the bodies themselves. It is the stresses in the intervening medium which cause electrically charged spheres to move relative distances from each other. A supersaturated intervening medium pushes the charged spheres apart when both spheres are charged with like electricity.

We also observe that two bodies charged with unlike electricity attract each other. We say they are attracting each other because we see them come together.

The fact is that when opposite types of electricity in the two spheres neutralize each other, an electrical vacuum is created between them. The electrical bristles of one become paired off and neutralized by the contrarily charged electrical bristles of the other. In this electrical vacuum, the pressure of the ether surrounding the two spheres pushes them together. Thus, a neutralized intervening medium allows two spheres to come together.

We have been observing that an imponderable force causes the observable motions of ponderable substances. We also observe that when the two spheres touch together and thus equalize their electrical charges there is no longer any electrical stress in the intervening ether.



FIG. 14 A.

A represents an insulated ball which has been charged with electricity either positive or negative. The electrical lines of force are simply radial. The electrical charge is uniformly distributed over the surface.

FIG. 14 B.

B represents two similarly electrified insulated balls which are oppositely charged, and brought near to each other. One has a positive and the other a negative electric charge. There is a tension along the lines of force so that they tend to draw the electrifications on the surfaces of the balls toward one another, increasing the electric charges on the near sides and lessening the electric charges on the far sides. By neutralizing each other on the near sides a vacuum like tension in the intervening medium is created, drawing the two balls together. There is also a lateral pressure in the medium tending to keep the electrical lines apart from one another. These lateral pressures also cause an unequal distribution of the lines over the surfaces. They are densest on the parts nearest each other.


It is as natural to say that two spheres attract or repel each other as it is to say that the sun rises in the east and circles around the earth. The facts are that the earth itself rotates and the sun is relatively at rest.


Similarly, the two spheres which seem to be attracting or repelling each other are actually being pushed around by the electrical ether which is invisible.


FIG. 15.

When a nonelectrified metal ball B is brought under the influence

of a positively electrified body A the action is one in which the intervening medium takes an essential part.

Some of the electrical lines of the field that

surrounds A pass through B, entering it at the side nearer A and leaving on the far side.

(The distributions of the electrical charges on A and B are shown by dotted lines.)
If the ball B has no charge of its own, as many electrical lines

will enter on one side as leave on the other.

The induced negative charge on one side and

the induced positive charge on the other will be exactly equal in amount.

It is, therefore, not the spheres that attract or repel each other, but the electrical charges that they carry which determine their positions in relation to each other.

Consider, for example, a large, circular room or laboratory with a high ceiling, in which a hundred pith balls, varying in size from 2 inch to 3 inches in diameter, are suspended from the ceiling by silk threads in such a way that they hang at a height just above a man’s head; they are all in the same horizontal plane, and are irregularly spaced in relation to one another.

Then, assume that the air in the room is very dry and motionless and that each pith ball is electrically charged, from contact with a cat’s fur which has been rubbed on glass or any other material that will impart an electrical charge.

Due to the electrical stresses in the intervening ether, the pith balls will then repel each other, like an expanding universe.

Now, assume that a number of gamma sources are placed, at random, around the walls of the laboratory so that they project gamma radiations in the plane in which the pith balls are freely suspended on their insulated threads. The force of these rays striking the pith balls will cause the spheres to move about, but the pith balls will never collide.

This is, of course, theoretical. Radiating pressures have been demonstrated, but the intensities available from most present day sources are probably too low for such a quantitative demonstration.

When we relate to the solar system the physical facts that we have observed in regard to pith balls, it becomes evident that the electrical stresses in the intervening ether cause spheres, sun, earth, moon, planets, stars, all of which are free to move, to arrange themselves in accordance with these stresses. The stresses cause the motion. The spheres are held apart at "arm’s length," the stresses in the ether being the arms.

All the planets of our solar system revolve around the sun in a west to east direction. Our moon and the two moons of Mars revolve around their planets from west to east.

Jupiter has twelve moons. The eight inside moons travel from west to east, but the four outer moons revolve "the wrong way," from east to west. Retrograde or east to west motions are also characteristic of the outermost satellite of Saturn’s nine moons, of four moons of Uranus, and of one moon of Neptune.

When these motions of the satellites some in one direction and others in the opposite are assumed to be due to electrical repulsion from all other heavenly bodies, we arrive at the simplest and most readily understandable answer to what is otherwise a paradox; except for the existence of the laws of dynamic electrical repulsion there is no reason why the satellites of the planets should travel exactly as they are observed to be traveling.

The sun keeps its planets and the planets keep their satellites at arm’s length through static electrical repulsion. Dynamic electrical repulsion causes the observed revolutionary movements; they can be most readily explained as being caused by the impacts of the radiant energy radiations which fill all space.

It appears that it is these dynamic radiations which produce the motivating gravitational fields of planets as well as satellites just as celestial electrical radiant energy rays produce the Drag of Gravity at the surface of the earth, causing the earth’s diurnal rotation and the weights of its materials.

The elliptical orbits of planets and satellites are also readily accounted for when we keep in mind the fact that action and reaction are always equal and opposite in direction. For example: the static electrical repulsive force from the sun to the earth and also, the one from the earth to the moon are constants at any fixed distance, but vary with the distance separating the bodies inversely as the square of the distance.

At any moment and at any point along the orbits of earth or moon, the opposing forces of static electrical repulsion, on the rear sides, must be exactly equal to the sun’s and to the earth’s static electrical repulsive effects in order to produce the resulting, and existing, positional equilibrium of the earth and of the moon in the solar system.

The opposing static electrical repulsions obviously must vary with the changes in the earth’s and the moon’s positions in the universe, as they travel through space, because these positions, at any moment, determine what repulsive forces are pushing on the opposite or rear sides.


Therefore, as the opposing static repulsions vary, the observed result is that the paths of travel of earth and moon, in their orbits, become distorted circles resulting in elliptical forms.


 Fig. 16

In the Copernicus diagram, showing changes of speed of the earth in its orbital travel, the ellipticity of the earth’s orbit around the sun is purposely shown on a greatly exaggerated scale.
The variations of the orbit from the average distance from sun to earth is only 1.67 per cent.
The shaded areas shown, SAB, SCD and SEF, have equal areas.
The earth’s speed in its orbit around the sun varies. The time from A to B, from C to D and from E to F is the same for each distance, illustrating the greater speed from A to B than from C to D or E to F.

The speed of the earth in its orbit around the sun changes from fast to slow as the distances between earth and sun increase, and from slow to fast as the distances decrease during the year.


The operational result of these positional cosmic forces is that the orbit of the earth deviates from an average or perfect circle by an ellipticity of 1.67 per cent, and the orbit of the moon by 5.49 per cent.

It is here postulated that the earth’s rotation is caused by dynamic energy radiations and that its revolutions around the sun are caused by static electrical forces. The revolutions of the earth around the sun and of the moon around the earth are in approximately parallel planes. The plane of the moon’s orbit around the earth varies approximately 5 from that of the earth’s orbit around the sun referred to as the ecliptic.

The rotation of the earth occurs on its Axis of Figure, which is slanted to the ecliptic by 23 27’. It becomes evident that different imponderable forces are responsible for the different directions of motion; if it were the same force in each case, the revolutions and the rotation would be in more nearly parallel planes.

The speed of the earth in its orbit around the sun varies. The earth moves faster when nearer to the sun, and proportionately slower when further away. The diurnal speed of rotation of the earth compared to a perfect clock varies by 8 or 10 seconds, being fast or slow at rather irregular intervals of a few decades.


It therefore becomes obvious that the earth is not spinning from the momentum of a force imparted to it once for all at a time called "Creation", but that it is spinning due to constantly applied forces of radiant energy, its total intensity being subject to slight variations.



Fig. 17. Changes of speed of the moon in a twenty eight day period.

The moon, in its journey around the earth, is ahead of its mean position in first and third quarters

and is behind its mean place in second and fourth quarters.

This change in speed is called the moon’s variation.

The moon moves fastest in its first and third quarters, when it is moving away from the earth along its own orbit. It moves most slowly in its second and fourth quarters, when, in moving along its orbit, it is again approaching nearer to the earth.

This confirms the theory that static electrical repulsion fixes the distance between earth and moon; the speed of the moon’s motion is greater when it doesn’t go counter to that repulsion, and it is less when the motion and the forces of repulsion go in opposite directions.

The relatively small variation in speed indicates that the disturbance of the intervening ether between earth and moon, by the electrical charges carried by these bodies, is very minor compared to the tension in the ether caused by all the electrically charged spheres of the universe. It is that greater tension which mainly determines the relative positions of earth and moon.

The evidence shows that it is repulsion and not attraction that causes the changes of speed in the moon’s motion.

The so called evection has a period of 1’8 year and displaces the moon by 131 degree of arc forward or backward. The so called variation has a period of a month and displaces the moon by 40 minutes of arc in such a way that the moon is ahead of its mean place by that amount between new moon and first quarter, and between full moon and third quarter and behind at other times.

Furthermore, as the moon moves through space the directional path of its motion is continually changing; its motion therefore cannot be due to momentum, which moves a body only in a straight line.


Two reasons for its zigzag, serpentine, or wavy motion, are:

(1) that the moon’s orbit around the earth is inclined about 5 to the orbit of the earth around the sun, and

(2) that the Axis of Spin of the earth is inclined 23 27’ to the plane of the orbit of the earth.

Therefore, as the moon journeys through the heavens, while constantly revolving about the rotating and revolving earth, it rises and falls, like the horses on a

Fig 18.

Why the indirect influence of planets on the motion of the moon, as transmitted through the earth, is more marked than the direct influence from the planets. The effect is transmitted by electrical disturbances of the intervening ether.

merry go round, rotating on a 23 27’ slant, with a 5% variation, while at the same time it moves forward in space with the whole solar system; this results in a curvilinear motion, not a straight line, and eliminates the theory of motions by momentum.

It has been observed and recorded that the direct influence of planets or the motion of the moon is much smaller than their indirect influence as transmitted through the earth.

Obviously this cannot be caused by the "attraction of masses," but would naturally follow the laws of electrical influence and confirms the assumption that all heavenly bodies are charged with "like" electricity. Like repels like.

The earth, being a very much larger body than the moon, receives more electrical effect than the moon from the approach or retreat of a planet, and the electrical stresses and disturbances caused in the ether by the changes in volume of induced "like" electricity are a greater influence on the position of the moon than is the direct electrical influence of the planet.

Comets on their first appearances always have their tails pointing away from the sun.


When a comet passes from one side of the sun to the other side, its tail changes its observable position, and, whereas the tail followed the comet when approaching the sun, the comet follows its tail when receding from the sun.

If the head of a comet is solid matter, its place with its tail in celestial space is fixed by static repulsion, like other heavenly bodies.


The tail being of less solidity, possibly gaseous is deflected away from the sun by the bombardment of the sun’s rays, like a feathered shuttlecock in the wind.

The weight of evidence based on the foregoing physical facts all refuting the theory of universal mutual attraction of masses is sufficient to prove that the theory is unscientific, being in variance with observable facts, and leads to the only possible conclusion:

Universal Mutual Attraction of Masses Does Not Exist.


FIG. 19.

A comet’s tail follows as it approaches the sun.

The comet follows the tail as it recedes from the sun.





Causes the tides of the oceans to be low under and opposite the moon.


When the tide tables given in the publications of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey are compared with moon tables for same day and hour, they show low water under and opposite the moon at various ports open to the ocean and not in estuaries. Science writers generally adhere to the postulate, but now believed to be erroneous, that every particle of matter in the universe attracts every other particle of matter to itself. Obviously, such mutual attraction of celestial masses for each other would cause the universe to collapse.


Astronomers studying the motions of stars and galaxies tell us that the universe is expanding and is not contracting. Obviously, an expanding universe and the mutual attraction of masses within it cannot co exist. An expanding universe and low water under and opposite the moon both indicate that electro static repulsion is the motivating force.

FIG. 20. Static electrical repulsion between moon and earth causes the liquid portion of the earth to be depressed when under and opposite to the moon, resulting in the diurnal tides.

Ocean water levels vary with the electro static repulsions of moon and sun (we here leave out wind and storm pressures).


The moon’s pressure, which is about 2% times greater than that of the sun, may be aptly called its aura. Both cover about half of the surface of the earth at any one time. Since water is practically incompressible, the electro static pressures are immediately and uniformly distributed.


The greatest depression of the surface waters of the oceans occurs directly under and opposite the moon, and the least effects of moon pressures are found to occur at the edges of its aura, causing the phenomena of low water under the moon and high water about six hours later.


High tides rise higher when barometric pressures are low, a fact which confirms pressures as controlling tide ranges.

At the latitude of New York City the diurnal tidal trough, under the moon, moves with the speed of the rotation of the earth, at approximately 600 miles per hour. Traveling at that speed the tidal trough arrives at the same place the next day.


The moon remains overhead, but travels faster than the surface of the earth, so it takes approximately 52 minutes each day for the earth to catch up to its former position under the moon, varying from 13 to 80 minutes. About six hours later the tidal protuberance, following the trough, arrives at the same location.

Sandy Hook is on the west shore of the Atlantic Ocean, and its tidal changes are not affected by their having to pass through estuaries.


Tide charts and moon charts show low water under and opposite the moon at Sandy Hook. This is one example, easy to check for accuracy, that confirms the fact that static repulsion, and not attraction of masses, is the cause of the fall and rise of the ocean tides.

At Sandy Hook, N.J., where the Atlantic Ocean joins New York Bay, a secondary or estuary tide takes over.


At the times of flood tides it reaches the Battery at New York in 35 minutes at a speed of 30 miles per hour (for tide level, not current flow). The tide wave then continues up the Hudson River to Poughkeepsie, at a speed of about 16 miles per hour (See "Time of Tides on Atlantic Coast," World Almanac).


The rates of current flow of tidal waters in the vicinity of New York City varies from zero to about four miles per hour.

All celestial bodies are here postulated to be charged with "like" electricity. Because like repels like, the universe is expanding, and is not contracting from the assumed attraction of masses. Electro static repulsion is what holds the earth securely in its place in the universe. A rubber ball, rolled under the flat palm of the hand, offers an analogy for action and reaction.


The moon and sun furnish action on one side of the globe and the stars of the celestial heavens, above the opposite hemisphere, furnish the reaction. The repulsions of moon and sun are a small part of the total forces of celestial repulsion, as otherwise the tide ranges would be greater. Electro static repulsion has been demonstrated as a true law of nature, while attraction of masses has failed to meet the acid test of duplicate measurements.

Earth tides in water wells have been extensively researched and show low water in wells at the time of the moon’s transit, indicating that the whole earth is affected by the moon’s aura.

From a preliminary study of the time of tides at ports on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, compared with the moon’s transit, the theory of static repulsion on the ocean waters is confirmed and the theory of "moon pull" is confounded. Research indicates that few tidal anomalies should remain when careful studies are made of the speeds of estuary tidal waves, and the effects on the tidal waves of depths, contours, and coastal shelves of the estuaries.

The closer the moon and the sun get to the earth, the greater the tidal disturbances. The lowest and highest monthly tides occur when perigee (the time when the moon is nearest to the earth) and new and full moon (the time when the moon and the sun are on the same or opposite sides of the earth) occur together, and become still lower and higher when the earth is nearest the sun (perihelion), as it is in January.

It is evident that the ocean waters are not being pulled up as the earth rotates under the moon; if they were being pulled up into a protuberance, then surface currents would disclose the flow of water. On the contrary, when the ocean waters are compressed, by repulsion from the moon, then subsurface currents, difficult to detect, are created and promote west to east surface currents as the tide trough moves westward.


H.U. Sverdrup, in his classic work The Oceans (page 551), states that,

"The obvious criticism that can be directed at this theory [of lunar attraction] is that a movement of a flood protuberance over the surface of the earth cannot take place unless water masses actually change positions; but consideration of the movement of the water has been completely disregarded"

[by a list of authors in a voluminous bibliography].




Physical Evidence Supporting Gravitational Repulsion

THE FORCE of gravity varies a small fraction of one per cent at different locations on the earth’s surface. We notice that some differences in the force of gravity occur relatively close together. At some locations near great mountains the force of gravity is less than at some locations on the plains. This is a direct blow to the theory of universal mutual attraction of masses.

The widely believed theory that the force of gravity is greater near large masses, such as mountains, is confounded by these recorded observations of actual measurements of gravity.

In the reports of measurements of the force of gravity in India, by the British Survey, the theory of "the hidden range" has been introduced to account for some of the variations from that accepted theory. No such invention is required for the Drag of Gravity theory to explain the variations in observed measurements of gravity.

It should therefore be clear that the theory of universal mutual attraction of masses does not fit the facts disclosed by the measurements of the force of gravity at different locations on the earth’s surface while, on the other hand, the Drag of Gravity theory does fit the facts disclosed by these same measurements.

The gravitational effect of the sun or of the moon at any point on the earth is at maximum when the sun or moon is nearest to it, and is also at maximum at the same time on the opposite side of the earth, at the point farthest away.

Fluctuations in the force of gravity caused by the relative positions of the sun and the moon have been measured by gravity and found to vary with great regularity during each day. When plotted as curves, the hourly readings are nearly identical for numerous days in succession.

When the curves for daily variations in gravity are assembled for longer periods of time, the over all curves are found to rise and fall. These have been called gravity drift curves. Both the daily curves and the drift curves follow the variations in the distances from the moon and the sun to the points of observation on the earth.

Earth tides in water wells and mine shafts have been analyzed and show low level at the time of moon’s transit (Special Publication #223, U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Report of Earth Tides 1936 38 by Walter D. Lambert).

The literature on gravitation reveals that many erudite scholars prefer to hold fast to what they were told in their youth, the belief that gravitation is an attraction between material bodies. The advancement of science is impeded when these scholars refuse to acknowledge the truth of gravitational repulsion by dynamic and static electrical forces.



WHEN A NEW theory is asseverated, tests of its fundamental accuracy need to be obtained even though the theory seems to be entirely reasonable.


To this end certain challenges are offered, citing physical effects which scientists could not at the moment predict with confidence, but which will naturally follow during such tests, provided the theory is correct. Such tests, if made and reported, will confirm or refute the theory of the Drag of Gravity.

We here list a number of suggestions for measurements which can be made with a fair degree of accuracy, and which relate to physical effects which could not be predicted with confidence under the prevailing theory of universal mutual attraction of masses, but are expected to confirm the Drag of Gravity theory.


Research Project No. 1
AFTER REACHING a maximum, pressures do not increase arithmetically with greater depths in the ocean.

According to our accepted rules of hydraulics, a column of sea water one foot high exerts a pressure of .44 pounds per square inch, and the pressures increase uniformly at .44 pounds for each foot until the bottoms of the oceans are reached.

At three miles down, the pressure (according to the formula) is over 7,000 pounds per square inch or over 1,000,000 pounds per square foot which is a value far above the crushing strength of such building material as brick. ("The crushing strength in Ib. per sq. in. of . . . common red bricks . . . ranged . . . 3010 . . . 4080 . . . 4960. . . 6361. . . Ordinary granite ranges from 20,000 to 30,000 lbs. compression strength per sq. in." Kent, Mechanical Engineer’s Pocket Book).

Yet from a depth of three miles where the above great pressures are commonly assumed to exist "bottomfish" and worms have been brought alive to the surface. (See reports from S.S. Challenger in Depths of the Ocean, by Murray and Jhort, p. 418. )

This supports the theory that gravitational pressures are surface pressures, for animal life could not exist under the commonly conceived bottom pressures and such animals also remain alive when brought to the surface, where of course such pressures are absent.

At depths of five miles in the Pacific Ocean (where pressures, according to the formula, are 11,616 lbs. per sq. in., and should have changed the sea bottom to solid material) a dredge produced slime, muck, meteor dust, etc. Depths of seven miles have been sounded (having 16,262 lbs. per sq. in. pressure according to the theory).

Proof or refutation of these great but theoretical bottom pressures is called for. The Drag of Gravity theory calls for their refutation.


Project No. 2
A TEST WEIGHT, on an accurate spring balance, will show a diminution of weight in a deep mine due to the shielding effect against celestial radiations of the earth materials above it. The percentage decrease in weight will be much greater than the percentage that the distance to the surface bears to the radius of the earth.

Project No. 3
A TEST WEIGHT, on a spring balance, in an anchored balloon or in a stationary dirigible airship, will show a diminution in weight not in proportion to the square of the distance from the earth, but in proportion to the loss of shielding effect against celestial radiations due to its distance from the earth.


Project No. 4
IN ASTRONOMICAL calculations much of the mathematics of repulsion and attraction may prove to be interchangeable, for Newton used the word "attraction" in his Principia to include either or both. Therefore, when a mathematical approach to calculations of variations in the speed of the moon, for example, as it approaches and recedes from the sun, is based on the theory of repulsion, it will be expected to encounter fewer difficulties than have mathematical scientists relying on the theory of attraction.


Project No. 5
A SHIP SAILING in the ocean toward the moon is sliding down an inclining plane, and should go faster; similarly, when sailing away from the moon, it goes uphill and should go at a slower rate. If those interested in predicting ships’ positions by dead reckoning, will take this fact into consideration, including the west to east gravitational push among others, they may be able to arrive at more accurate predictions. If so, their voluntary reports from time to time should prove helpful to science.

Project No. 6
MEASUREMENTS OF the shielding effect of large masses, such as mountains, against celestial radiations in one direction should show plumb bob deflections, and may be discovered by measurements made by either mechanical devices or electrical instruments.


Project No. 7
ALSO TO BE desired are laboratory proofs of celestial rays causing the weights of materials. One experiment would be to endeavor to shield a test weight on a spring balance from all celestial rays coming from a given direction; or, to produce a celestial ray vacuum while maintaining normal and undisturbed barometric pressures.

Strong electric currents, like artificial lightning, should deflect incoming celestial rays sufficiently to show instantaneous changes in weights of test pieces. Extremely thick lead roofings may show a similar shielding effect.


Project No. 8
THE VARIATIONS IN the force of gravity at different locations on the earth’s surface particularly where there are sharp differences relatively short distances apart should be studied and investigated for the purpose of establishing proofs of the existence of radiating materials beneath the surface. The Drag of Gravity theory recognizes a radiating earth!

Protect No. 9
SPRING SCALES HAVE been referred to as "notoriously inaccurate" because they measure true weight and not relative weight. True weight varies, so that an accurate spring scale will show different weights at different times for the same materials.

Changes in the weights of materials as the relative positions of earth, moon, and sun change or as atmospheric voltages change, have not yet been recorded nor reported; however, repulsion due to direct sun rays is a matter of record, and daily variations in the electrical voltage of the atmosphere is also a matter of record.

Variations in the weight of a test piece of material should be discoverable, when measured on a spring scale over any twenty four hour period of time and during periods of electrical disturbances, when cosmic radiations make the flow of earth currents sufficiently large to interrupt telegraph and telephone services.

Back to Contents