Gravitation and Subquantum Particle Flux 
(c) Robert Neil Boyd

I suggest that gravitation is the result of a constant flux of subquantum particles (aether flux), where one of the strongest sources of flux is the Sun. Then, as the moon passes between us and the Sun, the flux is partially obscured by the matter of the moon.

In fact, I suggest that all stellar bodies are effusive origination points of the particles which are gravitational flux. Every physical thing constantly both emanates and absorbs subquantum fluxes. In addition, even so-called "empty space" can originate flux. The subquantum flux is stochastic and anisotropic, as there can be measured excursions far away from the average gravitational flux. I suspect that a sensitive enough gravitometer will register slight deviations from the gravitational norm over a given time span, some of which could be rather abrupt.

Were this observed, this would inform us that gravitation is not actually a constant, more like an "average" which contains "noise" factors which might be observable to a sensitive enough instrument. I think the proper approach to designing such instrumentation is along the lines of Thomas Townsend Brown's gravitometers. Brown took advantage of the fact that there is an unmistakable interaction between gravitation and the instantaneous strength of the electric field in the vicinity of a given mass.

Brown thus used highly electrified massive dielectrics as gravitational measurement devices. When such an apparatus is placed in deep underground Faraday chambers, where external noise of all kinds is very strongly dampened, these stochastic deviations of gravitation become readily apparent. Gravitational variations are measurable with both capacitor pendulums, and with fixed capacitors, as variations in the electric field strength across the capacitor. With modern operational amplifiers such deviations can be amplified enormously and thus made painfully obvious. The electrostatic fluctuations which will result from gravitational flux density variations will easily evidence sudden "events", of unknown interstellar originations, again, due to the direct interaction between the electric field and gravitation which is observable across the capacitor.

Later, Dr. Brown discovered that deviations in gravitational flux density also result in variations in the electrical resistivity of matter. Due to this discovery, Brown constructed large carbon resistors out of lampblack-coated porcelain cylinders which were then scored with a rotary cutter, resulting in a fine carbon ribbon resistor with a resistance measuring well over 500 Mega-ohms. He then discovered that the gravitational measurement performance of these resistors exceeded that of his capacitive measurement devices in terms of signal strength and overall response characteristics.

By these measurements, Brown observed a direct relationship between gravitational flux and the resistivity of carbon. This has implications for the living conditions of carbon based life forms, as these results imply a direct interaction between gravitational flux density and the local resistivity of carbon, which could easily alter metabolic and electrical functions of biological organisms with observable variations linked to stellar and interstellar events, and the locations of the various planetary bodies and moons.

Now, I'm suggesting that the variations in aether flux density are clearly and easily measurable, as related to gravity, electric field strength and resistivity. This has nothing to do with "metrics". At all!!

The "gravitational wave" detectors which have been constructed from various massive cylinders of metals or ceramics at various academic institutions have thus far failed to measure any strong evidence of so-called "gravity waves". Why? I suggest that it is possible that the explanation for these failed measurements has to with the fact that there *are no gravity waves* to be detected, contrary to the theoretical expectations of such as Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler, based as they are on relativity theory, which we already know to be flawed. Again, I will point out that there is no readily discernable difference between the observations which occur as a result of "curved space" and those observations which occur as a result of a density gradient of subquantum particles which increases as one approaches the surface of a massive body.

Think about it.