Gravity remains a mysterious force. You could be forgiven for thinking that it is a well understood phenomenon, but in truth we do not understand the mechanism. It is described mathematically.

Gravity is also described as a property of mass, of course, but this helps little given that mass also remains a hypothetical entity. The Higgs-Boson (God particle) of the Standard model remains elusive, much like hypothesised graviton particles and gravity waves. In General Relativity gravity results from the curvature of space-time, whatever that means.

Either way, there is not enough mass in our own galaxy, The Milky Way, to account for it's fortunate tendency not to disintegrate. Hence the invention of further contentious hypotheticals like Dark Matter.

"...The equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass implies that gravity is also an electrical force. Before Einstein, some noted scientists were suggesting that the gravitational force between neutral particles might ultimately be due to electrical polarization within the particles. In 1882, Friedrich Zöllner wrote in the introduction to his book, Explanation of Universal Gravitation through the Static Action of Electricity and The General Importance of Weber's Laws, "…we are to conclude that a pair of electrical particles of opposite signs, i.e. two Weberian molecular pairs attract each other. This attraction is Gravity, it is proportional to the number of molecular pairs." Indeed, gravity can be represented as the sum of the radially aligned electric dipoles formed by all subatomic particles within a charged planet or star.

"This new electrical concept suggests that Newton's "universal constant of gravitation," or "G," is a dependent variable. G depends upon the charge distribution within a celestial body. Highly charged objects like comets look like solid rock, yet they have a gravitational field that suggests they are fluff-balls. And as they discharge they suffer what is euphemistically called "non-gravitational" accelerations. The extreme weakness of the force of gravity, compared to the electric force, is a measure of the minuscule electric dipolar distortion of nucleons. Gravity cannot be shielded by normal electrostatic shielding because all subatomic particles within the gravitational field respond to the dipolar distortion, whether they are metals or non-metals.

"What about magnetism? Ampere's law for the magnetic force between two current carrying wires is found to be equivalent to the transverse electric force caused by the distortion of electrons in an electric field. This distortion causes them to form tiny collinear electric dipoles. That is, the magnetic force is simply another manifestation of the electric force.

"This simple electrical model of matter has the great virtue of reducing all known forces to a single one – the electric force. However, it has a price. We must abandon our peculiar phobia against a force acting at a distance. And we must give up the notion that the speed of light is a real speed barrier. It may seem fast to us, but on a cosmic scale it is glacial. Imposing such a speed limit and requiring force to be transmitted by particles would render the universe completely incoherent. If an electron is composed of smaller subunits of charge orbiting within the classical radius of an electron, then the electric force must operate at a speed far in excess of the speed of light for the electron to remain a coherent object. In fact, it has been calculated that if released, the subunits of charge in the electron could travel from here to the far side of the Andromeda galaxy in one second!

"We have direct evidence of the superluminal action of the electric force, given that gravity is a longitudinal electric force. Indeed, Newton's celebrated equation requires that gravity act instantly on the scale of the solar system. It has been calculated that gravity must operate at a speed of at least 2x1010 times the speed of light, otherwise closely orbiting stars would experience a torque that would sling them apart in mere hundreds of years. Similarly, the Earth responds to the gravitational pull of the Sun where it is at the moment, not where the Sun was 8 minutes ago. If this were not so, the Earth and all other planets in the solar system would be slung into deep space within a few thousand years. Gravity is therefore an electrical property of matter, not a geometrical property of space.

"What is the nature of light? Einstein's special theory of relativity was disconfirmed right at the start by the Michelson-Morley experiment, which showed a residual due to the æther. This was later confirmed by far more rigorous repeats of the experiment by Dayton Miller. But by then popular delusion and the madness of crowds had taken hold and contrary evidence would not be tolerated. The Dayton Miller story makes interesting reading. If it weren't for the extraordinary power of self-delusion, commonsense would tell us that a wave cannot exist in nothing. So Maxwell was right, light is a transverse electromagnetic wave moving through a medium, the æther.

"But what is the æther? In the vacuum of space, each cubic centimetre is teeming with neutrinos. And since neutrinos are resonant orbiting systems of charge, like all matter, they will respond to the electric force by distorting to form a weak electric dipole aligned with the electric field. The speed of light in a vacuum is therefore a measure of the delay in response of the neutrino to the electric force.

"What about the bending of starlight by the Sun, which discovery raised Einstein to megastar status? The residual found in the Michelson-Morley experiments shows that the Earth and all ponderable bodies "drag" the æther along with them. The bending of starlight near the Sun is simply the effect expected of an extensive neutrino atmosphere held to the Sun by gravity. Light will be slowed in the denser medium – causing normal refraction or bending of light..."

Despite the importance of the electron, we know surprisingly little about it. For example, we don't know whether it's a wave or a particle, as it displays properties consistent with both (hence the term wave-particle duality) and, according to conventional wisdom, it has no structure.

"All attempts to measure the radius of the electron have failed! All we know is that the radius is less than 10-18 m; that is, its radius is one hundred million times smaller than that of the atom. All the known properties of the electron are consistent with the assumption that its radius is zero. As far as we know, the electron has no structure."

The above is quoted from the science museum's web site. It has an excellent section about the electron at http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/on-line/electron/

Independent New York researcher, Ralph Sansbury, has conducted a number of experiments that could have profound implications. The electron may not be fundmental and indivisible, after all. According to Sansbury, it is composed of smaller particles, which he calls subtrons that orbit within the classical radius of an electron.

A simple calculation gives the somewhat startling result that these subtrons are moving at speeds of 2.5 million light years per second! Theoretically, they could cover the distance from Earth to the far side of the Andromeda galaxy in less than one second. This gives some meaning to the term 'instantaneous action at a distance'. Importantly, this is a requirement for any new theory of gravity.

Further

Rupert Sheldrake, a professor at Cambridge University, has popularised the idea of morphic fields. To oversimplify, he theorises that memory is inherent in nature, and that all natural systems, from crytals to animals, inherit a memory of their kind. Each system is shaped by this pooled or collective memory. It is a view, of course, that has parallels with the Electric Universe, where there is a complex dance of electric particles and sub-particles.

www.sheldrake.org

From the link: "The implication is that many phenomena which until now have been regarded as purely statistical in character -- such as the distribution of fluctuations in the momentary rates of radioactivity measured in a sample -- are somehow controlled or at least strongly influenced by an astrophysical factor..."

If radioactive decay is linked to astronomical cycles, as these scientists argue, then this could challenge conventional chronologies. Additionally, if the solar system has suffered upheavals in recent millenia, especially of an intense electrical nature as many catastrophists contend, then traditional dating methods become almost obsolete.

In his book, The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind, Princeton Psychologist, Julian Jaynes, theorises that our current state of subjective consciousness is a relatively recent phenomena, and that mankind not so long ago lacked the same degree of self-awareness that we enjoy today.

In recent millennia mankind may have acted at the mercy of a now largely defunct area of the right brain, in a fashion more similar to that of some form of automaton. Strange as this may sound, Jaynes provides some powerful and compelling arguments to support his case.

Interestingly, the time frames he proposes for this breakdown in bicamerality coincide roughly with those suggested in much catastrophism related thought. Though Jaynes was not a catastrophist in any conventional sense, there exist some interesting parallels, nonetheless.