From Nicholas Dalton:

I am a science teacher and I have been exploring a problem that has been nagging at me for some time.

Current theory on matter formation is founded on two concepts: a “Force of Attraction” and a “Force of Charge”. However in over 150 years of research, the bests minds in the world have failed to discovered a satisfactory explanation for the actual physical mechanisms behind either of these two forces.

Einstein in fact theorized that Gravity was not a force of attraction at all, while the Standard Model proposes that a “force transfer particle” is responsible. But that simply adds a layer of complexity while still not providing any real, mechanical explanation for how the process actually works!

Doesn’t it seem strange to you that despite all our advances in the other areas of science, as well as computing, there is still no explanation for these forces?

Doesn’t it seem suspicious and rather precarious considering that vast amounts of research are optimistically based on these two complete unknowns?

The truth is that the only clearly understood mechanism known to science that can be mistaken for a force of “attraction” is an energy gradient (vacuums, osmosis etc)

I was so intrigued by this fact that I decided to develop a hypothetical Energy Gradient model just to see if it could be used to explain the world around us.

Admittedly this model is simple and takes some creative, though sound liberties, but it succeeds remarkably well.

And this hypothetical Gradient Model is especially interesting when it is used to model the atomic structures of the elements. They do not take the traditional spherical shape of the Bohr model. Instead they are three dimensional. But most significantly, their structures clearly reflect all the characteristics we know about those elements; valence, metal, nonmetal, conductivity, reactivity etc. I find that remarkable and quite beyond coincidence.

These structures even explain the strange 2, 8, 8, 10 Bohr orbital pattern that, for a growing sphere, should logically be 2, 8, 10, plus, ….

My question is this; considering that the forces of “attraction” and” charge” are so fundamental to modern theory, don’t you think that this very strange situation is worth examining?

Don’t you think that such a prolonged mystery is rather suspicious and deserves at least a little attention and discussion - especially if a hypothetical Gradient Model can be substituted with such surprising success?

Could it possibly be that “attraction” and “charge” are merely illusions created by an energy gradient?

This Gradient Model is currently an 88 page paper which can be found in PDF form at my web page www.daltonscience.com.

I would very much like to hear your opinion or advice.