"Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"

[Zeitmaschine]

What else could be accelerated by ionization except air? Electrons perhaps?

One should ask Kapanadze whether his device works in a vacuum or not.

[verpies]

What else could be accelerated by ionization except air? Electrons perhaps?

All elements can be ionized.
Electrically accelerated can be: ions, electrons, protons, positrons, muons, charged dust, ping-pong balls, etc...

[d3x0r]

Yes, attraction of magnets has a lot to do with gravity (which is just a pseudoscalar 3D motion in all available dimensions).
Anyway, take a look at the illustration below depicting the head-on collision of spinning baseballs, to get a rough* mechanical idea why magnetic phenomena is perpendicular to electric phenomena and read this for a detailed explanation.  Take your time reading it - if you just skim it without understanding, then it will be lost on you and you will annoy me with confused questions later.

Still following through the information...

I can't stand to watch them despite understanding Russian.
Electrons orbiting the nuclei disgust me too much.

Haha  


sure; but one way or another the electrons are moving through the cloud of atoms, even if it's in a probability field and not a distinct point.

re: the question you didn't understand; doesn't matter.  Just a suggestion that putting a magnet near the wire modifies the expected path; shrodinger's cat... or maybe heisenberg; if you are measuring the field for example putting an obstruction in it that reacts to the field, you change where the field is.... (sorry to use the word obstruction... ferromagnetic substance in this case, something that definatly participates with the force that is magnetism... like putting a rock in a river is an obstruction, it changes the path of the river....)



But isn't abstracting the behavior of particles to an external particle still making that external particle react to force at a distance? It just pushes the bump in the rug down in one spot, but it pops up in another?  I guess because of the presupposed density of these virtual particles, there is a much shorter distance to operate at....


It makes the point of observation a mechanical byproduct, but the virtuals still go towards a mass... or clear out electrostatic and allow gravity to attract... Or otherwise experience force at distance...


but if the electrostatic was increased between N-N poles, wouldn't you get a sensation of a charge field? (like a van degraff) which generates a large electrostatic field(composed of composite, discrete electron fields), but the attraction/repulsion is still very weak.


(maybe you can ignore this, I'm only halfway through the first paper, and should go back and reference the papers before hand)


I'll throw  this out too, if gravity is driven by these virtual particles, how do they escape the gravity and get back out and around to continue pushing a mass?  Or is every gravity source essentially a black hole?  (again, just got to halfway where he provided a link about this sort of behavior, and haven't finished)



(Added) I see.  Gravity isn't a virtual photon force.  It's an impossibility.  If bodies are expanding to keep pushing against you, and to... no actually the theory makes no sense what so ever.  Take Earth and Jupiter.  Jupiter would have to be expanding faster than the earth; and in turn extending the orbits of everything else proportionately; but in different proportions.  (another paper on how to keep acceleration without expansion) Well, since his basic idea has to be revised, how is anything else built on the platform even stable?

[Khwartz]

All elements can be ionized.
Electrically accelerated can be: ions, electrons, protons, positrons, muons, charged dust, ping-pong balls, etc...

But not neutrons! Isn't it?

[verpies]

But not neutrons! Isn't it?

Yes.
However if neutrons are removed from the nucleus and exposed to the environment outside, then in 14.7 sec. half of neutrons will decay into  protons, fast electrons and anti-ν_e.