Attractive or Compressive. What's at the center?

I see the leaf twisting in the air but cannot see the wind, yet I know it must be there. When I stand I feel the weight upon my feet and see the stone drop from my hand but cannot see the force that makes it fall. Sight does not reveal all, and many unseen forces form and direct the dance of matter we observe. We measure and name these forces and predict their results as they interact with matter and with light, but our discoveries never generate final answers. Instead they seem only to generate more questions. Our latest observations have generated questions we have named “dark matter” and “dark energy”, both somehow related to the force we call gravity. As our theorists and scientists seek answers to these new questions, I seek answers to other questions. Specifically; is gravity attractive or compressive, and is there a difference? Before I’m told to put my hand down, as if I were in a classroom asking a dumb question, I would like to explain why I am confused. I have been told by experts that pressure inside a star, or planet, increases with depth below the surface and is greatest at the core or center. This appears correct if celestial spheres are being squeezed into shape from outside, but if they are formed by micro bits of matter attracting each other into spherical shapes it would seem that pressure would increase with depth until the attraction of the matter above begins to balance the attraction of the matter below. If this is the case a zero gravity state would logically follow to exist at the exact center of mass. I liken this to a tug-of-war between the gravitational attraction of mass below competing with the gravitational attraction of mass above. On the surface the pulling team below has the advantage because it has all the players on its side pulling down, but as the tug-of-war rope moves below the surface toward the center of the sphere, the tug-of-war team players systematically move from the pull down team to the pull up team as the mass above increases and the mass below decreases. The deeper they go more and more players switch to the pull up side until they reach the center of the sphere where equilibrium is reached with equal players and equal mass all around creating a stalemate and a zero gravity state. The conclusion that zero gravity and zero pressure conditions exist at the center of all massive celestial spheres seems to contradict many other theories and observations and I remain confused. Is gravity a compressive condition of space acting on matter or an attractive force between matter acting on space, or both? Einstein’s field theories show a connection between matter and gravity similar to a couple arguing about who is in charge. Mass is constantly being pulled around by Gravity. Mass complains but Gravity responds that it is Mass that makes her pull on him. Resolution seems impossible and divorce is not an option. Comments to this blog to help me resolve the paradox of where maximum pressures reside inside stars are welcomed.

When a protest becomes a threat

Confrontations over social issues can take many forms. Peaceful protests, obstruction, intimidation, stalking and violence are all examples. Unfortunately laws do not effectively differentiate between these various confrontational forms. In free societies, laws do not always treat ideological differences fairly for fear of trampling on a citizens right to free thought and speech. In more despotic forms of government protests are dealt with swiftly and sometimes with deadly force. Free speech is an essential element of our democracy and guaranteed by our constitution, but there are limits. Slander is not allowed. Creating panic without due cause is not allowed. Likewise certain activities used as a means to voice an objection or opinion are not allowed. One cannot jamb up a revolving door to a department store because they sell perfume tested on animals, or drop stink bombs onto a construction site because forests are being destroyed. Striking workers however, can recruit surrogates to parade up and down sidewalks with ready made signs, war protestors can infiltrate funerals for fallen soldiers, religious protestors can interfere in gay right activities, protestors can block access to abortion clinics, and neo Nazis can parade with anti-Semitic banners…. as long as these activities are infrequent and of short duration; But there is one ongoing protest that has lasted for decades and is an every day occurrence carried out by the same few individuals who claim their right to free speech excludes restriction because their message is from God. They claim they are free to continually harass, intimidate, threaten and promote harm to others with impunity. Clergy, politicians and lawmakers cower and avoid suppressing these protest activities because this small group has succeeded in drawing the line between what they believe and any modified or alternate view so narrowly that any reasonable attempt to restrict their activities identifies the police or judges as non Christian. These same militant few are treated with kid gloves by police and prosecutors because the protestors revel in anyone’s attempt to control their activities as an opportunity to publically broadcast their obstructionist cause and claim their cause is the victim of state interference in a free expression of religion. Any other continuing protest activity lasting decades and involving stalking, personal threats, invasions of privacy, bombings and killings by a small group of militant evangelists would have labeled them terrorists and been dealt with swiftly but these few radicals have intimidated our leaders and infiltrated government agencies, not to serve the people but to serve a single obstructionist cause. They succeed because their voices are loud and threatening, not because they truly understand or are compassionate. They persist because they have used their single issue to divide our society into believers and non believers and have created a state of avoidance by the law. Ignore them and they will never go away. They have even corrupted our language. Before their decades long campaign of intimidation the word 'choice' had a good connotation. It was at the core of our democracy and morality. Now the word has been turned into a single evil option that cannot be used without their agenda ringing in our ears. I would urge everyone even partially seduced by their rhetoric to go unannounced to one of their protests and pretend you are violating their barrier, or just stand aside and observe. These people are infiltrating your government and slowly usurping your rights, not just as it pertains to their cause but many more. The intensity of one's beliefs does not make their beliefs any more or less true, and this type of militant evangelism is potentially as dangerous as any other radical cause. I would ask those that enforce the law to apply it equally to these obstructionists. A thirty year reign of intimidation and stalking is not a peaceful protest. I would urge the rational clergy to disclaim these religious intimidators and allow others with different beliefs to exist in peace. If you ignore them you condone their approach and will eventually draw their militancy into your churches. We have had enough of religious wars and the deeper you draw the line between those who pray and those who don't, the less likely anyone seeking religious refuge will cross the line.

To Tell the Fruth and Nothing but the Fruth

Fruth is what happens when fiction gets tangled up with the truth. Sometimes this occurs by accident or by being overly exuberant but more often this twist is intentional, and when done by skilled language manipulators fruth is difficult to identify. As a carefully concocted almost truth, fruth can misinform, mislead, and malign. It can sway elections, warp important decisions, turn a benign religion into an army, create mass hysteria and destroy nations. Fruth has caused witches to be burned, the innocent to be executed and allowed sociopaths to acquire high office. Politics is filled with fruth as differing opinions and opposing ideologies clash in the contest for public opinion. In 2015 abortion again became a flash point in the US congress when the religious right tried once again to blur the line between church and state by pitting the bible against the constitution. Facts in such arguments are not clear concepts and are easily fruthed. In this case party “R” threatened to hold the country’s budget hostage if an anti abortion provision was not included and forced party “D”, trying to keep the budget process clear of such side issues, to reject the infected bill. Then party “R” who originally threatened to shut down the government accused Party “D” of being the cause of the near shut down by not acquiescing to party “R’s” demands. It doesn’t get much fruthier than this ridiculous display of twisted truth.