Long ago just prior to Newton’s fame, the enlightenment era crew, now called “scientists”, proposed that objects of mass (weight and inertia) were attracted to each other by a mysterious “force” to be called “gravity”. Newton became famous by forming a means of measuring the effect of this “force of gravity” so that it could be tested with a variety of mass objects. And after doing such testing, it was discovered that sure enough, masses did seem to behave as though there was a mysterious force attracting them and related to the amount of mass of each object.
A superstition is a concept superimposed onto an observable physical event so as to “stitch together” the event and the cause of the event. In more ancient times such superstitions were called “gods”, an invisible controller of events and the forces were the “magic” due to them being invisible yet causing sometimes surprising events. And not being visible or understood by the common people, they were “super-natural”, forces that are not themselves physical yet govern physical events.
The “force of gravity” was in fact one of these “superstitious, supernatural forces”. And because the cause and the event of mass attraction could be reliably measured, it was accepted that the “force of gravity” was in fact a certain physical existence, even though never directly seen or see-able.
A few other “philosophy of physical science” types had an issue with this proclamation of the “Law of Gravity”. The proposed certain law seem to be suggesting that two objects that had absolutely nothing between them would magically reach out and affect the other. Einstein referred to such things as “spooky action at a distance”. It seem inconceivable that two things could have truly nothing touching and yet affect each other. And Hendrick Lorentz with a few others tried to come up with a more reasonable explanation for why masses would behave in such a way as to imply some magic force.
But it seemed to be beyond their collective imagination as to how this mass attraction behavior could work unless there was some kind of spooky action at a distance. So over the past 200 years or so, the entire world has accepted that the magic force actually, physically exists, it just can’t be seen or explained, “magic”.
Rational Metaphysics: Affectance Ontology is a particular understanding of affects, all and any affects. And what we call “mass attraction” or “the effect of the force of gravity” is certainly an affect to be understood. And we all know that such an affect really does occur. It is objectively testable and very observable. So what is the understanding concerning how that magic force works?
Science is all about finding the reasons behind anything and everything through independent investigation and study. And as it turns out, that magic force, spooky action at a distance, “force of gravity” is found in RM:AO to not actually exist at all. The behavior akin to mass attraction certainly happens, but there is no actual force involved. The “Force of Gravity”, that “spooky action at a distance”, doesn’t actually exist as a real entity, merely an aberrant effect of other formerly not explained nor imagined events. In that regard, Einstein, Lorentz, Maxwell, and others were right. The Force of Gravity, the god of mass attraction, is a superstition cast into the world due to reliable correlation data rather than complete rational thinking.
Very briefly, what is actually happening (provably so) is that each and every mass is a concentration of the very same substance that exists between every mass and other masses. In modern physics terms, that substance could be called “ultra-minuscule electromagnetic pulses”. In RM:AO, it is referred to as simply “Affectance” (meaning “subtle influence”) and is measurable and explainable as to why it exists and precisely how it behaves. What is called a “sub-atomic particle” is merely a concentration of that substance and is constantly reconstituting itself by releasing and absorbing tiny portions of Affectance (“ultra-minuscule electromagnetic pulses”).
If one could see Affectance in the seemingly “empty space”, it might look something like this (an emulation of such a substance);
The releasing and absorbing of affectance causes a buildup of affectance surrounding each and every particle. That buildup is nearly impossible to actually see although it can be measured merely by watching what happens when anything passes through it. And what happens when another particle of mass passes through it, is that the concentrations of affectance, the “particles”, migrate toward each other as though they were being attracted by an invisible force. And they do that because as the reconstitute themselves from their own surrounding, the concentration becomes higher toward the other concentration that has been surrounded by a higher field of affectance. In short, the particles merely migrate together as they constantly reconstitute themselves from their surrounding.
The animated graph below displays a particle of affectance/“mass” as it grows and diminishes in accord with its surroundings.
And the following emulation (using the principles involved) display what such a particle you look like if one could see a particle growing and see the affectance (“ultra-minuscule electromagnetic pulses”) from which is constitutes itself.
I haven’t emulated the migrating of particles together in such a display yet (although I have done so in a far less display-oriented program), but once seen and understood along with similar understandings concerning “charge” or “electric potential” and “magnetic” behavior, ALL of the “forces” proclaimed in modern physics and science in their Standard Model can be seen to certainly be merely superstitions, modern day “inexplicable gods” governing the behavior of sub-atomic particles and thus all material objects.
The Modern Science concept of “Forces” is merely a Modern Science superstition stemming from the Newtonian era. Such “forces” do not exist at all, except as an aberrant after-effect (as Einstein, Lorentz, Maxwell, and others suspected), much like the gods of Rome or Greece; “Helios is the cause of the Sun rising”. One can say, “it is as though the forces exist”, just as one can say, “It is as though the god Helios raises the Sun”. And the justification given that “We know it exists because it reliably performs” is no different than the once given justification, “We know he exists because he relaibly raises the Sun for us each and every day”.
