Dear Bengt,
Bengt Nyman wrote:
...
Let us now charge the foil positively by removing some electrons from the foil. The result is a number of aluminum atoms missing electrons, becoming positively charged aluminum ions. Since aluminum is conductive, electrons in the foil will move, allowing the electron deficiency to travel to locations allowing maximum distance between positive aluminum ions. The ions will consequently be found evenly-spaced around the periphery of the aluminum foil.
Will this change the weight of the foil ?
Yes, the foil has lost the weight of the missing electrons.
Will this additionally alter the electrostatic interactions between the foil and the earth resulting in a larger change in the measured weight of the aluminum foil ?
No, for two reasons.
Reason number 1:
The positive charge of the foil will attract and induce a local gathering of negative electrical charge in the earth below, superimposing whole body electrostatic attraction between the foil and the earth to the already-existing gravitational attraction but not altering what we define as the gravitational pull, or the weight of the aluminum foil.
Reason number 2:
Dipoles in the lower portion of the foil will experience the influence of the positive ions above it, while dipoles in the upper portion of the foil will experience the influence of the ions below it. These adjustments are internal to the foil, cancel each other externally, and do not influence the electrostatic gravity between the foil and the earth, just as folding the foil in half is a change without any effect on gravity as long as the center of gravity remains in place.
Your explanation is a plausible, but an infinitely weak attempt, to defend dipole gravity. It is reasonable to accept that charging the foil will surely cause redistribution and reorientation of all dipoles of the foil as well as those of the earth. I could as easily "refute" your "refutation" of our "refutation".
I only need to do simple changes to your piece of work. I will do such manner of simple transformation: "will re-balance the forces" --> "will not re-balance the forces", "weight is the same" --> "weight is not the same". Your defense of dipole gravity just rely on what you choose to say - there is no clearly defined physics involved.
I could try a more serious refutation of your analysis: Let the original "querious foil" be at the North Pole, the N-foil. Let there be another S-foil at the South Pole. When the N-foil is charged, the N-foil and earth dipoles would rearrange themselves. Assume the weight of the N-foil remains exactly the same. Now, there are two different configurations of the earth's dipoles - before and after the charging of the N-foil. Result: the two different configurations of the earth's dipoles would imply that the weight of the S-foil would be affected - therefore undefined! Dipole gravity fails!
Of course, Bengt could attempt an infinite feedback loop argument: the S-foil would reorientate causing further reorientation of the earth's dipole ... causing further reorientation of the dipoles of the N-foil... at final equilibrium of the feedback loops, everything remains fine and balanced.
Only the Almighty God knows if that's how the rebalancing will turn out
Wal Thornhill's electric dipole gravity would indeed be correct if that's how nature is designed to work according to the Will of God.
Best regards,
Chan Rasjid.