Gravity, Gravitational Acceleration & Geo-Magneto-Electric Field Behavior

Reduced Signal Variability & Anomalous Air Gas Polarization Events

A theoretical framework, designed to extend Michael Faraday’s vision of an empirical approach to identify & investigate correlated gravitational and electromagnetic fields

Exploratory Research Analysis Strategies


Exploratory Research Objectives: Exploratory research methodologies are used to investigate a general area of interest, identify patterns in data, with an eye for potentially viable hypotheses. This type of research is not limited by a need for experimental control constraints, but rather the strategy is to expand the focus to include all possible relevant factors which might contribute to or be correlated with variables of interest. Michael Faraday, the pioneering experimentalist, moved fluidly between exploratory and hypothesis testing approaches.

Visual Analysis: Are there patterns of interest which appear in graphic displays? Do those patterns repeat over time?

Statistical Analysis: Are there viable statistical analysis approaches which can be used to organize, and better understand the data?

Descriptive Analysis: Do the Visual and Statistical analyses complement or contradict each other? Can integrated perspectives tell a coherent story?

Pattern Recognition

A repeated pattern of interest is associated with the timing of polarized air gas surges. All surges in graphic displays (Figures 1-6) begin after sunset and are substantially reduced by the time of or shortly after sunrise. There is one notable exception to this pattern: In Figure 6, shortly after sunrise there is a reduction in air gas density followed by a second surge of polarized air gases well after sunrise.

Another pattern of interest can be seen in each of the figures (1-6) displayed below. For demonstration purposes, please notice the behavior of the Y’ magnetic field vector for Figure 3 (7-8 August 2020). As can be seen, there is noticeable amount of Y’ magnetic field signal variability as tracing begins at noon local time. This is followed by a gap in recorded data (missing data). When recording picks up at 4:15:50 PM signal amplitude variability continues until the time of sunset at which time a reduction in signal variability occurs just as a surge in anions can be seen. By early morning of 8 August, substantial signal variability returns to the Y’ magnetic vector amplitude variability and ion densities return to baseline levels. Because some version of this signal amplitude variability/ion density pattern occurred in each of the figures below, magnetic signal amplitude variance was selected for further analysis.

Figure 1.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


Figure 2.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


Figure 3.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


Figure 4.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


Figure 5.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


Figure 6.

Gravity, Geomagnetics & Polarized Air Gases


The Magnetic Field

Magnetic Signal Amplitude Variability


Each 24-hour data-set for month of August 2020 was divided into three (3) segments:

1. Beginning at noon and continuing until Anion signal reached a stable 4000 ions /cm3 (Time 1)

2. From end of Time 1 until Anion surge peak (Time2);

3. From end of Time 2 until 11:59:59.5 (Time 3);

Statistical Analysis of Magnetic Signal Variability


The variability of each geomagnetic vector (X’, Y’, Z’) was calculated using variance (i.e. standard deviation squared) for each of the time frames listed above. In preparation for this analysis all “stair-step” signal discontinuities were removed and data segments were detrended, bringing signal average to 0 nT. Figures 7, 8 & 9 (below) offer a graphic display of comparison of signal variance for time segments 1, 2 and 3. A consistent pattern of reduced geomagnetic amplitude variability is seen for all geomagnetic vectors during time of anion surges (Time 2). This pattern of reduced geomagnetic signal variability during time of anion surges is a consistent pattern and invites further exploration of the interrelatedness of geomagnetic fields and air gas polarization processes.

Figure 7.

X’ Axis Magnetic Field Variance


Geomagnetic field amplitude variability (red) is reduced during polarized air gas surges.

Figure 8.

Y’ Axis Magnetic Field Variance


Geomagnetic field amplitude variability (red) is reduced during polarized air gas surges.

Figure 9.

Z’ Axis Magnetic Field Variance


Geomagnetic field amplitude variability (red) is reduced during polarized air gas surges.

Questions Begin to Emerge

As visual analyses and statistical analyses began to paint a coherent picture, questions arose: What is happening from a geomagnetic frequency perspective during time of polarized air gas surge activity? Is it possible to consider that the geomagnetic field could be showing indications of modified frequency behavior during time of polarized air gas surge events?

Research Project Origins & Future Direction

Allowing data to guide the exploration


This exploratory research project began as a conceptual continuation of the Copper Wall Research Project conducted at The Menninger Clinic by Dr. Elmer Green in 1990s. As the research wrapped up, numerous questions remained unanswered: Why are negative ion densities elevated in mountainous regions? Is there any relationship between polarized air gases and geomagnetic fields? A possible connection to gravitational fields was not considered at that time. As exploratory data began to accumulate, graphic displays regularly pointed directly at gravitational field change indicators such as sunrise. Could ion density be causally related to gravitational field change processes? Not likely! It is generally accepted that air gas polarization is not related to gravitational or geomagnetic fields. Friends asked, “Are you CRAZY?!” It is well known that ionization requires an energy source! "What energy source do you propose?" Not knowing, living with uncertainty, tolerating ambiguity is the gift of exploratory research. Inspired by Michael Faraday and his conviction that gravity and electromagnetism are a singular, unified field; fascinated (and dismayed) by Einstein’s proposed planetary work-around, the “homogeneous gravitational field;” and grateful for David Bohm’s “Implicate Order;” following the data has led to development of an empirical approach for unraveling one of the longest-standing conundrums for the field of science. Are gravity and electromagnetism unified? This question remains unanswered, but with readily available scientific instrumentation and a sound methodological strategy, it is suspected that a data-based experimental approach will provide useful perspectives to theoretical discussions.

Ocean Surf


Ocean surf is an abundant source of negatively charged air gases. As Gathman (1986) confirmed:

“Spray droplets separated from the water surface by the stress of wind action on waves may also be charged. The charge on these drops is produced by electrostatic induction and the polarity and magnitude will depend on the direction and magnitude of the geoelectric field at the point of their separation from the water’s surface. As the electric field at sea is usually of a direction to produce negative inductive charge, we can say that except for rare instances (i.e, thunderstorms) spray droplets are negatively charged.” (p.227)

Albert Einstein


Albert Einstein, the theoretical physicist, was influenced by Faraday’s ideas and he recognized the importance of a unified foundation for physics, a unified foundation for the field of science. He explained that the General Theory of Relativity was not fully developed and therefore could not be considered a comprehensive foundation for physics. Speaking of his own contributions to the field of physics, he said:

"But it cannot be claimed that those parts of the general relativity theory which can today be regarded as final have furnished physics with a complete and satisfactory foundation. In the first place, the total field in it appears to be composed of two logically unconnected parts, the gravitational and the electromagnetic. And in the second place, this theory, like earlier field theories has not up till now supplied an explanation of the atomistic structure of matter.” (p. 113)

In an effort to manage the complexity of the multi-sourced gravitational fields in his general and special theories of relativity, Einstein conceptualized the gravitational field as homogenous.

"The acceleration of a body in a pure gravitational field is independent of its material; or, in a coordinate system of uniform acceleration (accelerated in relation to an “inertial system”) the motions take place as they would in a homogeneous gravitational field (in relation to a “motionless” system of coordinates). If one assumes the equivalence of these two cases is complete then one attains an adaptation of our theoretical thinking to the fact that the gravitational and inertial masses are identical.” (p. 85-86)

Einstein’s idea of a homogenous gravitational field was chosen to reduce conceptual complexity and deal with, for example, “the problem of the planets...” (p. 88). While this notion of a homogenous gravitational field was possibly a useful tool for simplification of theoretical formulations, it does not accurately describe the real world impact of multiple gravitational fields on material substance.


Referenced Materials

Gathman, S.G. (1986). Atmospheric Electric Space Charge Near the Ocean Surface. In: Monahan, E.C., Niocaill, G.M. (eds) Oceanic Whitecaps. Oceanographic Sciences Library, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2_21

Einstein A. Out of my later years. New York: Open Road; 1956.