Other pages on this site outline how gravity and strong forces are both due to one-dimensional and truly continuous energy links.  These links exert a pull between particles.  Different axial and spin directions however, cancelled out in such mixtures of links.

The weak force involves identical links but that page also brings a hint of electromagnetism. 

There is a mention that charge can also migrate due to the weak force.

You can get along fine with existing electromagnetic theory but this page is included to show that the pull of the same continuous links also explains electro-magnetism.  Links and other concepts behind the four forces unify them and reinforce each other at all levels, validating the whole Starpulls Theory like no other.

Few people these days are really interested in any “grand unification”.  The prospect of applying even a tiny shift in perspective and interpretation to just about every scientific concept they have ever learned can be downright horrifying (and can result in some interesting behavior).  If you have not read the other pages or can handle the whole truth anyway, then please do read them all. 

Gravity is so weak because of an infinite number of competing links from random directions but a fighting advantage can be gained by specializing.  Nature uses two properties of matter to do just that and build bonds much stronger than gravity.  For example, a tiny refrigerator magnet easily picks up a nail that the whole earth could not hold down by gravity alone.

Charge is the fundamental property of particles that is responsible for electricity.  We certainly know how to use charge (just look at the advances in electronics) but until now had no idea what exactly we were dealing with.

Most simply put, charge is a predominance of either source or termination couplings on a particle. 

If a particle has positive charge it will source the establishment of more links than it terminates.  The reverse is of course true for negative charge.

It’s a loaded question.  Individually, they are identical in strength (because they are some of the very same links).  When organized into a specialized bundle however, their density results in a pull much stronger than gravity.

A (+) particle with excess source couplings is more likely to form links to a (-) particle that has excess terminations, (thus gaining an immediate leg up on gravity). 

So begins a dramatic effect on the probabilities of link formation, resulting in a tremendous difference in link density and resultant strength. 

These links stand in marked contrast to gravity links that are scattered.  With a trail blazed, others instantly join the easier path.  The growing density of links actually guides new ones by confining them to the straight and narrow.  The bigger and denser the bundle becomes, the faster it grows.  The growing bundle makes it ever easier for new links between the particles of opposite charge and at the same time makes it ever harder for other links to break in from "unwanted" directions. 

This doubly effective positive feedback creates an avalanche effect, snapping from a state of almost no links to exponential numbers sourced in the same direction and contained in bundles.  (Fig. 1)

Like charged particles do not repel, they are just normally more attracted to anything else.  This is not an issue of semantics, and the misconception of repulsion should have been corrected when electrons were first discovered traveling in pairs.

This condition occurs in solid state physics and in high temperature superconductors where electrons are isolated in channels between different materials.  Under those special conditions another electron is definitely not “repelled”. The two electrons are still somewhat mutually attracted because they are so much closer to each other than to anything else.

What happens in everyday circumstances is exemplified by two positively charged particles.  One has extra source couplings but the other has proportionally even fewer than normal terminations to accommodate them.  The odds of completing any mutual link are even less than for gravity. 

Any attempted link gets bounced back like a baseball hit right over the head of the pitcher (Anim. 1).  As others follow suit, an avalanche simultaneously occurs in the “wrong” direction.  The reversing bundle is thus strong enough to cut through other links in cross directions.

Spin is not just a property of matter known to be correlated with magnetism.  Spin is in fact the actual cause of magnetism.  Some links have an axial twist or spin because the particles they are coupled to have a spin. 

Most simply put, magnetism is a specialization or grouping of links spinning in the same direction. 

For a particle spinning ‘west to east’, the angular momentum vector points ‘North’ or ‘up’.  When ‘viewing’ the physical spin axis of any particle end-on, the North Pole will always have most links spinning CW and the South, CCW.

Specializing in spin direction is nature’s second way to dramatically affect the probabilities of link formation. 

A particle sourcing links spinning in a given direction has better than gravity’s odds to form links to a particle with couplings spinning in the same direction. 

As with electricity, the avalanche effect forms bundles that are exponentially stronger than gravity.

At this point it would be logical to ask; “how can the N pole of one magnet attract the S pole of another if the links are spinning in opposite directions”?  This handedness character involves the issue of perspective.  When N and S poles are viewed head-on spin directions are in fact opposite (Figure 2). When one magnet is turned around so that N faces S however, links spin in the same direction right through both magnets, and they pull together.

Electricity and magnetism are not “two sides of the same coin”.  The two phenomena and the mechanisms behind them remain distinct.  Electricity and magnetism can be used independently with their own very different properties. 

You don’t expect to get a shock from a magnet any more than shuffling across a dry carpet and having a paper clip jump to your finger.

Having said that, electricity and magnetism do have a lot in common;

• the pull of links
• properties of particles that promote specialized bundles of links 
• uniquely bipolar
• comparable in strength
• operate over long range

The term ‘Electromagnetism’ was coined because of an interaction between electricity and magnetism that is very special indeed.  Electricity and magnetism are inextricably related by the fact that accelerating bundles of magnetic links are always accompanied by bundles of electric links at right angles, and visa versa.  As a result, science considers it to be all one field with two orthogonal components.

The key is in understanding just how acceleration of one field brings forth the other.  There is obviously something very special going on here.  The degree of interaction depends on acceleration so this is definitely a physical process.  What underlying mechanism can possibly explain the fact that the two fields and the axis of motion are all mutually perpendicular?

Not only that, but the polarities and directions are always in a fixed relationship (characterized by the famous hand rules).

The motion of a bundle of electric links does not magically “create” a magnetic one as currently assumed.  Orthogonal magnetic links of appropriate polarity are simply collected out of countless others in the random mixture in any body or in space.  (Here is another confirmation that pre-existing links are omnipresent).

A rope sweeping up other fibers at right angles is a close but not quite accurate analogy.  Just how does a moving electric bundle ‘select’ only magnetic links and only those spinning in one direction?  Something like the process of natural selection in biology, the bundle breaks through all links in its path; however the ‘fit’ links survive a little longer. (Anim. 2)

A ‘fit’ link is one that survives because it goes along with the spin or flow direction of the one at right angles.  Any other combination does not go along and therefore breaks sooner.  At any given instant there is a surviving population of selected links at right angles to the moving bundle. 

Reversing polarity of the moving bundle or the direction of motion will of course reverse polarity of the selected links.  This is the key to every electro-magnetic device from alternator, bell, buzzer, choke, contactor, dynamo, electromagnet, generator, meter, motor, relay, servo, solenoid, speaker, telegraph sounder and transformer.

This process is also involved in propagation of electromagnetic radiation.  A transverse pulse in an electric bundle (photon) collects a magnetic one on its leading edge.  As the electric pulse moves on, magnetic links slide down the trailing edge and reconstitute it by replacing failed electric links. 

Magnetic links on the leading edge fail and are replaced as more are collected, and the whole process repeats.  This trading of energy between the electric and magnetic bundles can go on indefinitely across any expanse of space.

The lack of an explanation for the circular magnetic fields around a current-carrying conductor always bothered me.  The field of a permanent magnet was mysterious enough, but at least it was seen to emanate from and return to an identifiable object.  The circular field seemed to go from nowhere to nowhere, in the middle of nothing.

In Fig. 3, as the electron moves along the wire, its radial electric bundles again collect orthogonal magnetic bundles of appropriate polarity out of countless links in the random mixture in space. 

These bundles of magnetic links just happen to be selected at these points in space and have their own distant sources and terminations.  Amazingly, the selected magnetic bundles form a series-aiding ring around the wire.  Thus the magnetic field surrounding a current carrying conductor only appears to be circular but is really composed of countless little magnetic segments.

To build an effective electromagnet, you must coil the wire.  All of the circular fields are brought together instead of being spread out along the length of a straight wire.  Inside the coil, all of the ‘circular’ fields have the same direction and combine to act like a bar magnet.

Michael Faraday first displayed these lines by sprinkling iron filings on paper atop a bar magnet (Figure 4).  A nearly identical display can be made for electric links around (+) and (–) probes by using grass seed suspended in an insulating liquid.  The lines of filings or seeds trace the positions of bundles of links, not individual links. 

If these simple and repeatable experiments were to produce any clearer evidence for the existence of links it would have to jump out and bite you! 

Scientists inexplicably continue to insist that these lines are figments of imagination.  We are told that this is merely the structure of the fields but that the lines do not really exist. 

The lines of filings are not continuous because the magnetic bundles repeatedly fail and are replaced or their links migrate to adjacent bundles.  A filing aligns itself with one bundle and settles onto the paper.  The next filing to land may have to align itself with a new bundle.  Positions taken up by the filings constitute a time-lapse photograph. 

Why do the lines bulge out?  Very simple; when a bundle makes it from one end of the magnet to the other, it encloses millions of other links in space.  Like a bungee cord over straw, pull of the magnetic bundle compresses the enclosed links.  Another magnetic bundle goes further out (less traffic), encloses more links and compresses them on top of the first pile.  And so on. 

Some bundles go right off the paper but still come back around.  Magnetic fields of the earth or sun can form loops millions of miles long!  

There is also nothing to prevent a few bundles actually going off into space and linking to some distant body. 

Like the misconception of repulsion previously explained, most scientists are unaware of or ignore contradictory new experimental evidence.  The following is a quote from a NASA site.  “To Faraday field lines were mainly a method of displaying the structure of the magnetic force.  In space research, however, they have a much broader significance, because electrons and ions tend to stay attached to them, like beads on a wire, even becoming trapped when conditions are right. 

Because of this attachment, they define an ‘easy direction’ in the rarefied gas of space, like the grain in a piece of wood, a direction in which ions and electrons, as well as electric currents (and certain radio-type waves), can easily move; in contrast, motion from one line to another is more difficult.”

Is it not interesting how particles can be “attached to” or “trapped” by figments of the imagination?