How about an Experiment to Simulate Attraction?

My heretical doubt is that Miles' explanation of attraction is correct. He explained repulsion and attraction as like big proton-like bodies and little electron-like bodies floating around where a big proton-like body is shooting out basketballs, which hit the other big proton-like bodies pushing them away, but missing a lot of the little bodies, causing them to appear to be attracted to the central shooter. That doesn't explain why neutrons wouldn't be repelled just as much as protons, does it?

Anyway, can any of you guys set up a physical experiment or a simulation to show what would actually happen? My suspicion is that the electrons would be repelled about as much as protons.

Do yous want to discuss this?

.
Airman. Hi Lloyd. Within, say, a spinning proton emission field, at a certain latitudinal direction and nearby location, a larger radius particle would feel a greater number of emitted charge collisions, more charge resistance and be more actively repelled than a smaller radius particle. Smaller particles can therefore approach the emission source more closely - I see you don't agree? This charge emission density property creates a differentiation of electrons’ and protons’ presence in the field that was historically misinterpreted as equal and opposite electron and proton negative and positive charges. That is not a true attraction. I agree, Miles has described how that particular charge particle behavior creates an apparent attraction.

Neutrons, being the largest particles would experience the most charge resistance and will be repelled the furthest from the proton emission source. Neutrons don’t quite fit into the negative electron and positive proton scheme, nor do lone neutrons exist for very long in the wild, just 15 minutes before losing their exposed outer spin. In any case that charge particle, charge emission collision ‘repulsion’ property is just a sample of the charge particle’s full charge field behavior. It is not a sufficient basis to show what 'actually happens'.



Miles has also described how particles can and do approach a large charge emitting particle from the direction of the charge emitting particle’s fewest emissions, along the emitting particle’s spin axis. The least repelled incoming charge is in fact being driven by charge approaching the emitting particle’s spin axis poles. Given the more accurate, charge field description, your request to model what actually happens must, in my opinion, include both incoming as well as emitted charge. Such a model or simulation would need to be in accordance with Miles’ charge recycling diagram. We’ve talked around this subject a few times in the past.

Miles has described electrons caught in an eddy, orbiting a proton pole. Any decent charge particle simulation should be able to show that, as well as neutrons orbiting proton poles. Such a simulation could show various particles approaching a fixed proton or massive atom from different directions, with different spin directions and velocities, and how the incoming particle’s motion changes. I imagine certain initial particle conditions might describe paths following magnetic field lines, ... . I believe all that could be done by simulating charge collisions. It would be a worthy project, but I am otherwise occupied in the atom/molecule project with Cr6.  

You might try asking your AI how it would suggest making such a model.
.

At this point how much "charge" can flow through molecules from slots 1-6 in terms of Stacks? This is something I had in the back of my mind but Miles and LTAM has kind of flesh it out. Anything that looks out of place? Rotations are in play, local field effects per EPN also. We can get layouts fairly good with some fidelity. Is there an atom bond that looks totally out of character for Miles'? That's what we should be looking at. I know there are a few of them. Like superconductors, why do they let charge flow the way they do? Keeping mind "can this work?" in terms of Miles' layouts and "others". Miles has pretty much debunked the current structures though they are somewhat "predictable"...the goal is that this is an a collection of atoms that produce these characteristics...can Miles explain it or can "other?". I am at this point going forward. Really it is how much of natural phenomenon at the atomic level can Miles support-- bonds, chemical formations, electromagnetism, etc.? Provide a "%" of what Miles covers versus others. I give Miles a pretty high percentage at this point.