Gravitation - What's The Push Behind The Force?
Newton established the equations for gravitation, but he would not speculate on what the underlying cause of the phenomenon might be. "Hypotesis non fingo", he said, meaning "I won't make any guesses", at least in public. Indeed, we are left to this day without a generally agreed definition of what we are talking about when we say "gravitation".
Nieper's perisolar cushion model, as he called it at the time, was my first contact with "pushing gravity". It seems that this model goes back to the ideas of a man called Georges-Louis Le Sage who lived in the mid-eighteenth century Geneva.
"Whereas Newton's theory and (later) Einstein's relativity were essentially mathematical descriptions of the motions of bodies in gravitation, Le Sage's theory attempts to arrive at the cause of gravity. The basic idea runs like this. Space is filled with minute particles or waves of some description which strike bodies from all sides. A tiny fraction of the incident waves or particles is absorbed in this process. A single body will not move under this influence, but where two bodies are present each will be progressively urged into the shadow of the other."
Others say gravitation is an attraction mediated by an exchange of particles - gravitons - perhaps influenced by the popular expression "gravitational attraction", however neither have the hypothetical particles been found nor has the mechanism yet been explained in a satisfactory way. In the end, the field seems wide open to this day ...
- - -
There is also the anomalous acceleration of two Pioneer spacecraft on their way into the outer reaches of the solar system, which seems to tell us that our model of gravitation is not quite correct.
Jaroslav Kopernicky raises the question whether gravity could be an electromagnetic phenomenon.
This sentiment is echoed by Jan Olof Jonsson, who says in a short piece published in the Journal of Theoretics:
The search for a unified field theory has thus far been unsuccessful concerning gravity. Earlier an obstacle to finding an explanation due to electricity has been the existence of electrically neutral particles with mass, e.g. neutrons. Nowadays, when also these have been shown to contain charges, i.e. quarks, the electricity model would work. If assuming that the positive end negative quarks are situated at a distance from each other, a classical "dipole electric field" would appear from them, even though the sum of their respective charges is zero, merely due to classical electrostatics.
The typical behavior of dipoles also corresponds to that of "masses". They attract each other in that the part close to the center of the negative charges attract the part close to the center of the positive charges of the neighbor. Inevitably, this kind of attractive force must appear, due to Coulomb´s law, and hence the strength must be non-vanishing and thus a competitor to the "pure" gravity field explanation.
Numerical calculations would be needed before accepting the "new theory."
According to Frank Meno, gravitation is an anisotropic fluid flow. The conclusion of his paper:
"... it appears that gravitation can be accounted for on the basis of aether dynamics, provided that the aether fluid has suitable anisotropic properties which enable the existence of specific vortex structures. The electron vortex might be adequate to serve as the fundamental material entity from which other vortex systems are assembled. Electrical charge is accounted for on the basis of the two possible mirrored vortex structures, and mass is a parameter derived from the number of gyrons participating in the vortex assemblies. This concept leads to the view espoused by Descartes that physical reality is merely an interplay of extension and motion."
Robert Kerr says
Compression is the source of the apparition of attractive force. Gravitational force is exerted by an overtly undetectable fluid. The fluid has nearly infinite particulate density and particle dimensions are infinitesimal. The pressure of these fundamental particles is temperature. The irresistible force of temperature has not been explained. It is quantitated as the reciprocal of the coefficient of volumetric thermal expansion.
Well, I really cannot hope to do anything but scratch the surface of theoretical attempts to explain the mechanism, the force, behind gravity. Readers are welcome to add their own - or to comment on those already mentioned...
The Force Doubling Paradox of Gravitational Attraction
The argument is presented that the radiation pressure model of gravity is the only model that produces the correct values for the forces acting upon orbiting bodies. All competing attraction models produce values that are double the actual force which is required to maintain orbit. This force doubling paradox as detailed in this paper indicates that the Mass Attraction and General Relativity Attraction concepts are not viable models for the cause of gravity.
Book: What Keeps Us on the Ground? (Gravitation Explained) (Frank Meno)
GRAVITY AND ANTI-GRAVITY EXPLAINED by Mike "The Cowboy" Emery