Gravity Without Pulling: A Cavendish Experiment Reframed Through AMS

Gravity Without Pulling: A Cavendish Experiment Reframed Through AMS

Most explanations of gravity lean on a familiar phrase: mass attracts mass.
It works well enough for calculations, but it leaves an uncomfortable gap in intuition.
What is actually doing the pulling? And why doesn’t everything constantly fly together?

A classic Cavendish-style experiment exposes this tension beautifully.
Viewed through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) lens, the experiment becomes not mysterious at all, but mechanically obvious.

This post reframes the experiment using AMS, without breaking the parts of physics that already work.

The Experiment, Simply Stated

We begin with a balanced system:

  • A horizontal bar, free to rotate
  • Identical lead balls on each end
  • Perfect symmetry, no preferred direction

Nothing moves.

Now we introduce change:

  • Additional lead balls are placed near one side
  • The bar begins to rotate
  • A tiny force becomes measurable

In a related setup:

  • A small lead pyramid is weighed: 152.166 g
  • A heavy lead ball is placed beneath the scale
  • The measured weight increases by 0.001 g

Classical physics says this is gravitational attraction between masses.

AMS agrees with the measurement, but not the mechanism.

The AMS Reframe in One Sentence

Gravity is not mass pulling mass, but matter reshaping the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate, which then relaxes toward lower torsional stress.

Everything that follows is just unpacking that sentence.

What “Mass” Means in AMS

In AMS, matter is not a fundamental substance.
Matter is structure.

More precisely:

  • Matter consists of stable vorton knots
  • These knots:
    • lock substrate motion
    • store torsional energy
    • resist reconfiguration

A lead ball is “heavy” because it creates a region where the substrate cannot relax freely.

Mass is not a thing that pulls.
Mass is a constraint.

Why the Balanced Bar Doesn’t Move

With two identical lead balls:

  • Substrate distortion is equal on both sides
  • Torsional stress is symmetric
  • No gradient exists

In AMS, no gradient means no motion.

The bar doesn’t move because the substrate has no lower-energy direction to resolve toward.
Stillness is the natural state of symmetry.

What Changes When Extra Balls Are Added

Placing additional lead balls near one side does not add a new force directly.

What it does is:

  • Increase local vorton density
  • Deepen substrate torsion
  • Create an asymmetric stress gradient

The substrate now has a preferred direction of relaxation.

The bar rotates because:

The substrate is reconfiguring itself toward lower torsional energy.

Nothing is “pulling” the bar.
The bar is simply embedded in a field that is no longer balanced.

“Everything Attracts Everything” — Why This Doesn’t Cause Chaos

A common objection goes like this:

If everything attracts everything else, why doesn’t everything constantly move?

AMS resolves this cleanly.

Attraction is not pairwise.
It is field-mediated and gradient-dependent.

Key distinctions:

  • Uniform substrate tension → no motion
  • Symmetric distortions → no motion
  • Only gradients produce motion

This is why distant stars don’t disturb your furniture, while nearby lead balls affect precision instruments.

Gravity is not universal tug-of-war.
It is local stress resolution.

The Scale Experiment: What Weight Really Measures

When the lead pyramid weighs 152.166 g, the scale is not measuring “Earth pulling down”.

In AMS terms, the scale measures:

  • The substrate’s resistance to upward displacement
  • The local torsional gradient imposed by Earth’s mass

When a heavy lead ball is placed beneath the scale:

  • The local substrate gradient steepens
  • Downward torsional density increases
  • The substrate resists displacement more strongly

The result is a measurable increase in weight.

Weight is not attraction.
Weight is substrate reaction force.

Why Added Mass Increases the Effect

As nearby mass increases:

  • Vorton density increases
  • Torsional wells deepen
  • Gradients steepen
  • Reaction forces grow

This naturally explains why:

More nearby mass → stronger “gravitational” effect

No inverse-square magic is required at the conceptual level—only geometry, tension, and stored torsion.

The Core Insight

The Cavendish experiment does not show that masses mysteriously pull each other.

It shows something far more physical:

Matter reshapes the substrate, and the substrate always relaxes toward lower torsional stress.

Gravity is not an interaction between objects.
It is the bookkeeping of a continuous medium under constraint.

Once you see that, the experiment stops being strange—and starts being obvious.

​

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Validation vs. Valuation

Validation vs. Valuation I recently found myself reflecting on the difference between validation and valuation , and I realised that although the words are often used interchangeably, they point to very different things. Validation, at its simplest and most innocent, is a form of support in the moment. It says: you’re seen , you’re heard , you’re not alone right now . In practical terms, validation is important — we validate work to ensure it’s safe, correct, or fit for purpose. In relationships, it can be reassuring and kind. But validation has a shadow side. When validation becomes something I need in order to feel whole — when my sense of self depends on it — it quietly shifts from support into something corrosive. In its more sinister form, validation can become manipulation, or an inadvertent tapping into a core wound: without your approval, I don’t exist . At that point, validation no longer supports identity — it erodes it. Valuation is something else entirely. Valuation ...
Read more

AMS Guide Part 1 — Charter and Purpose

AMS Guide Part 1 — Charter and Purpose 1. What This Guide Is This document is a companion guide to the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) Ontology . Its purpose is to: explain the ontology in plain but accurate language reduce cognitive load for readers encountering the ideas for the first time provide intuition, metaphors, and narrative scaffolding allow readers to grasp what the ontology is doing without needing to adopt its formal vocabulary immediately The guide is not the ontology itself. It does not replace formal definitions or axioms. It exists to make them understandable . 2. Intended Audience Primary Audience Readers with: a genuine interest in science and how the physical world works some familiarity with scientific ideas and language curiosity rather than professional obligation A good mental model is: A regular reader of a BBC science magazine, Scientific American–style articles, or long-form popular science writing. This reader: is not a practi...
Read more

Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate

Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate I recently watched a video titled “There Is Something Faster Than Light.” The specifics of the argument aren’t the point here. What caught my attention was the familiar framing that followed: Newton versus Einstein, non-local versus local gravity, classical intuition versus modern physics. This framing is common. It’s also misleading. What follows is not a critique of either Newton or Einstein, but an attempt to understand what they were actually observing , why their descriptions differed, and how those observations can be unified under a single, coherent ontology — the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) . Newton: Gravity as Non-Local Action Newton’s law of gravitation is often caricatured as “action at a distance,” and historically, Newton himself was uneasy with that implication. From a modern perspective, Newtonian gravity is described as non-local : Two masses influence one another instantly N...
Read more