There is no such thing as gravity, dielectric acceleration IS (so called) magnetic attraction and IS (so called) gravity. It is one and the same thing, the only difference is coherency.
A magnet is a coherent and polarized object, any spatial extrapolation is polarization necessitatively. What drives a magnet is point non-specific and no different from any other holographic fractal in that respect. It is field incommensurability. A magnet does not have poles it has the inverse of counter-space. Space is the absence of inertia, it has no properties. Space acts on nothing, time acts on nothing. A field in and of itself has no quantity, no physicality, it is not phenomena. Space is a posterior attribute of a field, therefore it does nothing and acts on nothing. Space and Time are not autonomous forces, this is absurd. Modern science has never adequately defined polarity, or quantified a field for that matter.
“A magnet has 2 poles” is a description not an explanation. The loss of inertia necessitates polarity. The rest point in the centre is a result of pressure meditation. It is concentrated there because it is the inverse of space (force and motion) it is counter-space (inertia and acceleration). What we call a magnetic field is a reciprocating precessional hyperboloid resultant of a coherent dielectric object. Electricity is a byproduct OF Phi (magnetism) and Psi (dielectricity).
The 800 pound gorilla that shits on the head of modern physics and QM and that is going to turn the world upside down with countless new inventions MUST be and WILL be in dielectrics, not electricity. Classical magnetism does not account for the difference between centripetal convergence and centrifugal divergence and how they interact to cause dielectric voidance or counter-voidance (magnetic vectorization). Which is often incorrectly labelled as magnetic attraction/repulsion.
There is no need for a unified field theory; all fields are already unified. What is not unified is human comprehension of the nature of field modalities in relationship to one another. Mother Nature does not do math and complex calculations with virtual particles. The conjugate forces of reality are simplex and have been understood since ancient times, albeit foolishly dismissed by the arrogance of modern society.
Gravity is left entirely undefined and lacks a scientific denotation in principle, ergo the term is nothing other than a pseudoforce and you may as well say unicorn farts or pixie dust interchangeably. It makes no difference. DESCRIPTIONS ARE NOT EXPLANATIONS!
To summarize, gravity is incoherent dielectric centripetal acceleration towards a null-point of counter-spatial inertia. Essentially a hybrid field modality and byproduct of electromagnetism to put it in layman’s terms. Nothing more.
Proof masses do not accelerate towards each other:
Magnetism never attracted anything, it only displaces. When two magnets collide they do not attract towards each other directly but to a a void or counter-spatial null point of inertia between them.
In regards to atomist relativity theory;
There are no discrete particles in the universe and certainly none that mediate charges, discharges, magnetism, electromagnetism, gravity, and radiation, only fields, all modalities of the Ether. The so-called ‘electrons’ are not particles, not objects or subjects but are the dynamic principle of discharge, and are certainly not charge-carriers, fields are not particles, are not “electrons”, nor assuredly are there energy discharges in the vacuum of space involving ‘electrons’; the ‘electron’ is a fiction of fallacious observation and an even more faulty mental acuity, spawned naturally from the minds of materialists, or an Atomist.
Electricity is Ether in a state of dynamic polarization; magnetism is Ether in a state of dynamic circular polarization upon itself, is the radiative termination of electrical discharge; dielectricity is the Ether under stress or strain. The motions and strains of the Ether give rise to electrification. Phi times Psi gives Q; ‘electrons’ do not mediate these electrical and magnetic forces or likewise the Ether fields.
There is a widespread belief that individual Lorentz – Einstein transformation equations have a physical significance of their own and can be used independently of each other. Thus, for example, some authors believe that for transforming the electric field of a parallel-plate capacitor or of a line charge from one reference frame to another it is sufficient to use only the charge-density transformation equation. Similarly, some authors believe that the same seemingly correct results can be obtained by using just the electric and magnetic field transformation equations. An analysis of field expressions obtained by means of such transformation methods shows, however, that these expressions are incorrect. In order to obtain correct expressions for electric and magnetic fields by means of Lorentz – Einstein transformation equations, the equations must be used collectively, so that all transformable quantities in the system under consideration are properly transformed.
These and similar errors in the understanding of relativistic concepts and equations frequently result in incorrect representations of physical phenomena and in various relativistic “paradoxes” that have caused some scientists to criticize and even to reject relativity theory as such.
The answer is simple: As a physical phenomenon the relativistic (kinematic) Lorentz contraction does not exist. And the fact that several revisions of this concept had no ill effect on relativistic electrodynamics or on any other branch of physics is an excellent indication that the concept does not represent a physical phenomenon in the conventional sense.