after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.

2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is called the CRE force.

3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare to the other forces.
4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit aero.ud the earth for billions of years.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
>
> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is called the CRE force.
>
> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
> to the other forces.
>
> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
>

Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
look carefully at the quality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
you’re really in shape to do this anymore.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:10:55 AM UTC-5, Ken Seto wrote:
> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
>
> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is called the CRE force.
>
> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare to the other forces.
>
> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the repulsive CRE force/pdf is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit around the earth for billions of years.

5. A complete description of the about concept of gravity is available in the following link:
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
> > other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
> > realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> > 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
> > objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
> >
> > 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> > confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> > an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is called the CRE force.
> >
> > 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
> > force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
> > to the other forces.
> >
> > 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
> > repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
> > aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
> >
> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Ken Seto wrote:

> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
> called the CRE force.

you repugnant sack of shit, stealing theories like there is no day
tomorrow. "Is called .." is called your stupid thief ass, that's what is
called. There is a reason bill gaytes wants you thieves vaccinated from
this planet.

Ken Seto wrote:

> 5. A complete description of the about concept of gravity is available
> in the following link:

what 2015, you disgusting pile of shit? You stole the whole thing you
don't understand, recently. You evil stupid uneducated crackpot.

extreme crank, crackpot Ken Seto wrote:

>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but
>> please look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask
>> yourself if you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.

you stole what you post, you stupid charlatan.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
>>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
>>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
>>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
>>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
>>>
>>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
>>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
>>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
>>> called the CRE force.
>>>
>>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
>>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
>>> to the other forces.
>>>
>>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
>>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
>>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
>>>
>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
>> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
>> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.

Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
“creativity”.

Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
target.

Let’s find out.

>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 8:10:55 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> snip imbecilities<

Fresh crap from Ken Shito

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:56:10 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
> >>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
> >>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> >>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
> >>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
> >>>
> >>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> >>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> >>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
> >>> called the CRE force.
> >>>
> >>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
> >>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
> >>> to the other forces.
> >>>
> >>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
> >>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
> >>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
> >>>
> >> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
> >> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
> >> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
> > Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
> Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
> “creativity”.
>
> Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
> target.
Why don’t you point out what’s wrong....gutless.
> Let’s find out.
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:56:10 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
>>>>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
>>>>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
>>>>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
>>>>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
>>>>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
>>>>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
>>>>> called the CRE force.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
>>>>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
>>>>> to the other forces.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
>>>>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
>>>>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
>>>>>
>>>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
>>>> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
>>>> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
>>> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
>> Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
>> “creativity”.
>>
>> Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
>> target.
> Why don’t you point out what’s wrong....gutless.

Because I’m not here to suppress your loneliness by combative debate.

>> Let’s find out.
>>>> --
>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 2:39:35 PM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:56:10 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
> >>>>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
> >>>>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> >>>>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
> >>>>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> >>>>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> >>>>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
> >>>>> called the CRE force.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
> >>>>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
> >>>>> to the other forces.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
> >>>>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
> >>>>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
> >>>> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
> >>>> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
> >>> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
> >> Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
> >> “creativity”.
> >>
> >> Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
> >> target.
> > Why don’t you point out what’s wrong....gutless.
> Because I’m not here to suppress your loneliness by combative debate.
> >> Let’s find out.
Bullshit. If thee is anything wrong you would point out immediately. But you couldn’t find anything wong so you shut the fuck up.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 2:39:35 PM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:56:10 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
>>>>>>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
>>>>>>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
>>>>>>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
>>>>>>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
>>>>>>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
>>>>>>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
>>>>>>> called the CRE force.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
>>>>>>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
>>>>>>> to the other forces.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
>>>>>>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
>>>>>>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
>>>>>> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
>>>>>> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
>>>>> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
>>>> Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
>>>> “creativity”.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
>>>> target.
>>> Why don’t you point out what’s wrong....gutless.
>> Because I’m not here to suppress your loneliness by combative debate.
>>>> Let’s find out.
> Bullshit. If thee is anything wrong you would point out immediately.

Nope. As has been mentioned many many many times to you, your stuff is so
bad it’s not even worth rebutting. Notice that no one has downloaded your
book just to post reviews explaining what’s wrong with it. It’s not worth
any attention at all.

> But you couldn’t find anything wong so you shut the fuck up.
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 11:29:09 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 2:39:35 PM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:56:10 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 11:21:27 AM UTC-5, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> after 110 yeas of tryingPhysicists failed to uni te gravity with the
> >>>>>>> other forces after110 years of trying. The reason that is that they don’t
> >>>>>>> realize that gravity is a composite force as follows:
> >>>>>>> 1.It is an attractive EM force derived from the fact that the interacting
> >>>>>>> objects are expanding in the same direction in the E-Matrix as the universe expands.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2. The structure of the E-Matrix is divergent and the objects are
> >>>>>>> confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrux. This gives rise to
> >>>>>>> an repulsive effect between the objects and this repulsive effect is
> >>>>>>> called the CRE force.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 3. Gravity between the interacting object is the combined attractive EM
> >>>>>>> force and the repulsive CRE force. That’s why gravity is so weak compare
> >>>>>>> to the other forces.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 4. It turns out that the attractive EM force in combination wth the
> >>>>>>> repulsive CRE force is necessary for the moon to maintain a stable orbit
> >>>>>>> aero.ud the earth for billions of years.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ken, I don’t know if you’re recovering from a stroke or what, but please
> >>>>>> look carefully at the hequality of what you just posted and ask yourself if
> >>>>>> you’re really in shape to do this anymore. .
> >>>>> Idiot....what I post is the real cause of gravity.
> >>>> Maybe Richard Hertz will discuss your ideas with you, to applaud your
> >>>> “creativity”.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe Ed Lake will engage with you and tell you your book is right on
> >>>> target.
> >>> Why don’t you point out what’s wrong....gutless.
> >> Because I’m not here to suppress your loneliness by combative debate.
> >>>> Let’s find out.
> > Bullshit. If thee is anything wrong you would point out immediately.
> Nope. As has been mentioned many many many times to you, your stuff is so
> bad it’s not even worth rebutting. Notice that no one has downloaded your
> book just to post reviews explaining what’s wrong with it. It’s not worth
> any attention at all.

You are a woodworker. You are not qualified to judge my work. Go back to wake open toys.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> You are a woodworker. You are not qualified to judge my work. Go back to wake open toys.
>
>
>

Don’t you think you should stop trying to post if you are in such sad
shape?

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables