Late in the 19th century, blackbody experiments demonstrated that emission and absorption of thermal energy by matter could be characterized as an incremental effect governed by Planck’s constant.
Einstein used Planck’s constant to derive a formula and theory regarding the photoelectric effect, and modern particle physics were born.

There is another possible explanation for Planck’s constant: It is not a constant at all, but a characteristic of the fundamental frequency of
“baryonic matter”. Planck’s constant is then defined as resonant node in the electromagnetic spectrum, but it does not provide a limit upon the energy or frequency potential.

Above this frequency, the amount of radiant energy absorbed by baryonic matter is sharply curtailed because the natural antenna bandwidth of all baryons is too low to either absorb or emit energy. This also means that the natural impedance of baryonic matter to EMFs suddenly drops off at the Wien limit as well. Without the impedance caused by matter, there is virtually no reactive opposition to a standing electromagnetic field at ultra high frequencies: A virtual magnetic monopole.

The fundamental frequencies of protons and neutrons (I would prefer solitons or wavicles), vibrate and absorb energy up to the edge of this limit. This means that each fundamental particle has a fundamental field strength that is only slightly interactive with other baryonic matter. The low impedance at ultra high frequencies also means a great deal of energy can be stored in this field. We call this weak force associated with this field gravity. Since most of the mass of the solar system is concentrated in the sun, the local field strength is a function of the distance of the observer from the sun.

There are at least five ways to transfer energy to and from this ultra high frequency, but low impedance field:

1) Changing the Baryonic content changes the strength of the monopole. A system of two particles transfers more energy into the monopole field than one. Placing two particles in the same field also creates resonant frequencies that are additive and subtractive sums of the two or more particles. These resonances contribute to the stability of the system at discrete frequencies. This is why certain combinations of protons and neutrons produce more stable atoms, and the differences between these stable forms define the amount of energy released when particles are fused or separated.

As the Baryonic mass of the sun decreases through these fission and fusion processes, the field strength surrounding the sun slowly collapses. It is near the sun that this collapsing field is most obvious, because energy from this field is heterodyned with the fast moving particles ejected by the sun – the solar wind. This is why the solar corona is so much hotter than the surface - yes, it is tied to the magnetic moment of the sun, but the magnetic moments are also complex heterodyned function of the magnetic
monopole.

2) Baryonic velocity relative to the local field increases the limited interactions at higher frequencies. We call this effect inertia. All masses are in dynamic equilibrium at all times. When we place an object in motion, we must disrupt this equilibrium by supplying a force. Since this equilibrium is a function of mass, including the mass of adjacent objects, the amount of force necessary to move an object is proportional to the total mass of the system. In other words, it takes more energy to place an object in motion near the sun, than it does near the earth. The difference is small, but it is measurable (to be addressed later). Inertial energy is essentially an imbalance in the local monopole field. The initial reluctance of an object to move (static friction), is, in part, due to an inductive field disruption.

3) Hetrodyning in the wave function of the field due to internal chaos and resonance. The individual atoms of any and all bodies, even though they may vibrate at the same basic frequencies, rarely vibrate in harmony. This creates a chaotic wave function with nodes at higher and lower frequencies. But there are also low frequency harmonics that are very stable. This is why the orbits of planets, over time, become more circular. This is a confirmation of Bodes’ law. Comets, which are in highly elliptical orbits, randomly enter resonant modes with chaotic nodes. When this occurs, some of the comets inertial energy is converted to kinetic energy and the comet experiences differential heating – virtually an internal lightening strikes that liberate water and dust. As the orbit of the comet becomes more circular, the comet evolves into a common asteroid with fewer resonant interactions. Idaho spuds.

4) Hetrodyning or multiplication of the frequencies of electrically isolated baryons at wavelengths below the Wien limit. This is an extremely complex, but common phenomenon. Rain falling in atmospheres with high dielectric strength has the capacity for ‘shearing’ high frequency energy from the solar monopole. This can and does create point charges, which discharge as gamma rays. Rubbing cat fur, and any other complex motions that is electrically isolated can cause interactions with the magnetic monopole and produce triboelectric effects: Static electricity. This explains why clouds can develop opposite electric potentials. In fact the whole pair production scene witnessed in atom smashers can be characterized by chaotic interactions within a magnetic monopole.

5) When we accelerate two masses towards each other, the Doppler effect increases the frequency of the Magnetic monopole. This increase in cross-sectional area affects the velocity of any ‘wavecles’ between the two masses, including photons, effectively increasing the pathlength through space. Einstein interpreted this change in pathlength, as a change in either time or space curvature, but this interpretation is wrong. All relativistic effects can be expressed as a change in the pathlength and in cross-sectional area. The apparent increase in Mass of particle moving near the speed of light is really the transfer of more and more kinetic energy to the ultra high frequency electro magnetic field.

When particles are slowed, the energy returns from the monopole field. However, increasing the field strength leads to a great deal of ‘leakage’ as the field “lines of force” expand and interacts with mass at lower frequencies. This is why atomic accelerators are plagued by a
virtually uncontrollable propagation of static electricity.

General Relativity predicts that as a photon moves away from a massive object, it will be redshifted. If this magnetic monopole hypothesis is correct, the amount of redshifting predicted by General Relativity
is too small. This means more of the redshift observed in massive galaxies is actually be due to intrinsic gravitational effects. This is why there are so many more gravitational lensing events than general relativity predicts - Dark Matter not required. It also explains why ‘Blue; galaxies don’t appear to be found near the middle of clusters in local galaxies cluster, but do occupy the central regions of more distant galaxies (The Butcher-Oemler effect). If Blue galaxies are more massive, the intrinsic redshift displaces them in local space (field galaxies), but with increasing distance, the individual masses of the galaxies become trivial compared to the mass of the galaxy cluster as a whole, and the Blue galaxies plop back into the center of cluster star forming regions - right where they belong.

The Cosmic Microwave Background

If the sun is a magnetic monopole, all ionized particles in the solar wind are moving in a magnetic field, and they are slowed and deflected at the helopause, the natural outcome of this event is the creation of microwaves. The peak in the microwave spectrum is a function of both the solar wind and the ‘incoming’ microwave background of every galactic star. This is why there is a solar ecliptic, and many other signatures of contamination in the WMAP data.

There are many causal relationships that can be derived from this hypothesis - Already mentioned is an explanation for static electricity. This hypothesis predicts that static effects must be greater closer to massive bodies. It also predicts that turbulence is a
function of mass - The atmosphere of Venus should be more turbulent than in similar conditions on Earth. The atmospheres of planets and moons further from the sun than the Earth should experience less turbulent effects at the same pressure and temperature gradients.

Lower turbulence means less resistance, and this means that during atmospheric descent, less heating. Our probes landing on Mars and Titan have not generated the plasma heating signatures we expected during entry - this might be why. Likewise, Storms in the atmospheres of Jupiter and Saturn persist much longer than Earth-based models predict. There may be other factors, but a non-Newtonian turbulence gradient may exist.

The most stunning and testable prediction is that the path through space is a function of mass. This means that if the hypothesis is true, objects closer to the Sun than the Earth MUST be lighter than predictions based upon Newtonian orbital mechanics, and objects further from the sun MUST be heavier. If Maxwellian principles are applied, the amplitude of the monopole must decrease as 1/r, the force as 1/r^2, and the reactance - the “pathlength” as the natural log of the distance from the sun. If the mean density of the Earth and moon is assumed to be the mean density of all masses of all non-gaseous orbs in the solar
system, a density of about 4.47 can be plotted for each planet, from Mercury to Pluto.

Close to the sun, this gradient approximates the effect predicted by Einstein, but is should be much greater. This paper:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/np...amp;db_key=AST

shows the plot of the residuals in the Doppler shift of Pioneer 6 as it approached the limb of the sun. (This paper was pointed out to me by Ari Jokimaki after he read my description of how the velocity of a
probe should change in close proximity to the sun.)

The Pioneer 6 probe moved more slowly as it approached the limb of the sun, but then accelerated again after closest approach. In this interpretation, since the magnetic monopole field strength increases with increasing closeness to the sun, more of the kinetic energy of the probe is required to move in the stronger field. As the probe moves away from the sun, this kinetic energy is returned to the probe. Likewise, the 1/r ‘spring constant’ Anderson used to model the curious ‘solar wind’ effects upon Odysseus and Galileo follow this model.

If more potential energy is stored in more massive environment, probes to Venus are proportionally slowed, while probes to Mars must experience a slight acceleration, achieve a slightly different orbit upon insertion. This causes Newtonian physics to overestimate the mass of Venue, and underestimate the mass of Mars and more distant planets. When we interpret the orbital gravimetric data, the smaller accelerations near the mountain peaks on Venus appear as negative gravity anomalies, and likewise, valley floors appear as positive anomalies.

http://www.agu.org/revgeophys/bindsc01/node8.html
http://www.agu.org/revgeophys/bindsc01/node12.html

These are artifactsof the incorrect mass assigned to Venus.

On Mars, the situation is exactly opposite: The increase in the transfer to kinetic energy cause Newtonian physics to underestimate the mass of Mars as calculated from fly-bys and orbiters, so the mountain peaks are interpreted as having positive Bougnior gravity anomalies while valley floors appear negative.

http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/...s.internal.pdf
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2002/pdf/2024.pdf
http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/mcgovern02.pdf

If the gravitational potential measured ‘at altitude’ at other planets is wrong, there must be a gradient in this potential as an object moves closer to the moon or planet. This means that there should be degeneracy in the gravitational potential that is a function of orbital distance, and this should be evident in the radar mapping of Mars from various altitudes. We now have gravity maps of Mars from distances varying from 300 to 800 km, but the 800 km data cannot be reconciled with the 300 km maps. The moment of inertia for Mars appears to be different if ranging data to the surface probes (Pathfinder and Viking) is used than the inertial moment necessary to explain the orbital gravity anomalies. We will receive additional confirmation of this effect when Mars is mapped at 150km.

For objects such as the Pioneer probes, which are leaving the solar system, the net effect is very complex. There is a slight acceleration, due to the return of energy from the monopole field, but since interactions with the monopole field diminishes as a function of 1/r, rather than 1/r^2, the probes experience the appearance of a net acceleration towards the sun, relative to Newtonian predictions. This measurement is further complicated because the speed of light is also impeded by interactions with the monopole field, so the absolute speed of light in a vacuum increases as light moves away from a strong gravimetric force. We use the Doppler effect to measure the acceleration of the Pioneer probes, so to know the true path of the probes, proper motions must be disentangled from the very slight increase in the speed of light.

Summary

Baryonic matter – Neutrons and Protons, create a node or resonance in the electromagnetic spectrum. At frequencies below this node, baryonic matter impedes an electromagnetic field. At frequencies above this ‘Planckian’ cut off, matter does not inhibit electromagnetic fields, and they are great repositories of inertial energy.

No new physics are required to build this model: Magnetic monopole expansions are penciled into existing Maxwell field equations. These terms provide a much simpler explanation for what are now considered general relativistic effects.

Powerful predictions can be made on the bases of these purely Maxwellian forces, and tested within our own solar system. The most obvious and easily tested prediction is that the masses of the planets are incorrectly predicted by Newtonian physics, and we should be able to observe these variances with the existing generation of solar probes.

__________________
jwj

It's ok not to know. We should try harder to find out.

From the "I should know better dept."

If the impedance of baryonic matter were to drop then the matter would absorb all of the EMF encountered. However, if the impedance were to approach infinity then there would be no absorbtion/transmission of EMF and the matter would become undetectable.

(Just my thoughts at 5:45am with no sleep. Take it for what it's worth.)

__________________
I don't ask stupid questions. I just make stupid statements!!!

This may or may not cause problems with the rest of your hypothesis, but you have a problem here. The sun is not a magnetic monopole. In fact, its magnetic field is primarily a dipole as is the field of the planets.

In classical electrodynamics, magnetic monopoles do not exist. That's why one of Maxwell's equations is del*B = 0. The equivalent for electric fields is del*E = q/epsilon where q is the electric monopole charge contained within a surface.

If I get the jist of your hypothesis here, your positing a modification of Maxwell's equations to add a magnetic monopole term and claiming that this is an additional force that modifies gravity? Perhaps, but given that no one has yet detected a magnetic monopole you're making quite a leap. Here's the latest PDG summary of searches for magnetic monopoles.. Given your distaste for what you call "hypothetical" particles or concepts I find this conjecture slightly inconsistent.

Anyway, since no-one has observed a magnetic monople, and the sun most definitely is not one, the rest of your hypothesis from this point on is pretty much moot.

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

Well lo and behold, I may have spoken to soon. A little google search turns up a whole research area looking at instances where the sun's field appears to act as a monople. One such example is here. This paper also discusses the issue. However, a quick read indicates that what they are observing is transitory monopole-like behavior. Not an actual monopole. The second paper says as much in its first sentence Translated that means that magnetic flux lines going out also must also come back in. Monopoles, such as electric charges, have a non-zero flux.

So, there is perhaps some odd behavior in the solar B field. I'm still not sure that it allows for the rest of Jerry's hypothesis, however. I'll look into that as well.

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

There's a lot of words here, I'll only ask about a few.
Any idea what this frequency is? I doubt that it would be the so-called "Planck frequency" as 10⁴⁴ Hz is just too much! "What's the frequency, Kenneth?"--REM
Very slowly. Very, very, very slowly. Not enough for us to measure. And fission processes? What fission processes? (Besides the almost immediate breakup of Be⁸ into two alpha particles.)
Experiments such as Pound-Rebka found precisely the redshift predicted by GR. I know that this is an earth-bound experiment, but if there is anything to your latest proposal there should be some effect on Earth, after all Earth has quite a few baryons in it too.

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

So show me the equations...
One more thing. Tell me again why these solar magnetic monopoles which impinge upon earth remain completely undetectable on planet earth!!!

G^2

Maybe an electromagnetic(moving charge) effect that is tied to a particular(group) particle vibration mode that produces a (group of)particle with 'no' b-field(toroid).

10^35. Probably the frequency of the waves composing the electron..

Neither am I.

Conceptually, this is like an AC solenoid - an alternating current magnetic field will suck in a ferrous core against a weak spring. The frequency of such a field effect is normally constrained by radiative and inductive coupling with matter - the higher the frequency, the more the field strength is trashed. A field that does not normally interact with any particles would not be compromised...except for the gravimetric and inertial effects. The polarity of the field is not an issue, because is is constantly switching, but at such a high frequency, the field neither expands or contracts - a virtual steady state or monopole EMF.

That is a good place to start - think about it, the entire concept is built around the idea that there are limited interactions with baryonic matter, no inductance, no radiative coupling - just an unimpeded field that is very weak function of matter.

If this concept of gravity is correct, there are three obvious differences from GR concepts:

1) Time can be treated as a constant, and spacetime curvature is simply a pathlength function.

2) The nuclear strong and weak forces are the result of resonant nuclear electrical states.

3) Underlying chaotic, natural vibrations are responsible for beta decay.

Agreed, but the shrinking electromagnetic field may help explain the energy spectrum in the solar corona.
There are heavier elements churning around in the sun, but I am not arguing that they are a significant percent of the overall energy budget.

Yes, GR effects have been measured and verified at different elevations on the earth as well. As far as I know, these are not constrained any tighter than ~1/1000, so I would be very interested in published numbers with tighter error margins and constraints. IAOTO the acid tests are in the gravitational gradients that must appear to exist at different orbital distances from Venus, Mar, Saturn and Saturn's moons. These will pop-up like the gravitational anomally on Ganymede (with no corresponding surface feature), or as degeneracies between solutions at different orbital distances.

I have thought long and hard about this prospective, and the implications are intriguing. If you are talking about broadband impedance, I think your statements are correct.

What I am trying to describe may be better coached in terms of inductive and radiative coupling: At resonant frequencies, inductive and radiative coupling are high. I am arguing that above a fundamental limit, there is little inductive or radiative coupling between a standing electromagnetic field and matter – except for the gravitational, nuclear, and triboelectric forces we are aware of, and a few harmonic effects, such as the pathlength through space, which are mischaracterized.

Thanks for your comments, and sorry for the slow response, I have been in a hotel that did not have internet.

__________________
jwj

It's ok not to know. We should try harder to find out.