“Mankind has uncovered two extremely efficient theories: one that describes our universe's structure (Einstein's gravity: the theory of general relativity), and one that describes everything our universe contains (quantum field theory), and these two theories won't talk to each other.”
― Christophe Galfard, Professor Stephen Hawking's graduate student from 2000 to 2006

That is basically the basis of the unsolved unified field theory
Magnetism is connected to gravity
Magnetism is connected to electricity
Therefore there should be a connection between gravity and electricity

It seems this article may provide the beginning of such a discovery

@AnonySchmoose One reason general relativity theory and quantum field theory won't talk to each other is that general relativity is entirely a product of Einstein’s mathematical imagination. There is no laboratory evidence for its existence.

I don’t know whose imagination produced a quantum field.

@yvilletom
Except . . .
"Tests of general relativity serve to establish observational evidence for the theory of general relativity. The first three tests, proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915, concerned the "anomalous" precession of the perihelion of Mercury, the bending of light in gravitational fields, and the gravitational redshift." [en.wikipedia.org]
And . . .
"Einstein's theory of general relativity (GR) provides the best available description of gravity. The recent detection of gravitational waves and the first picture of a black hole have provided spectacular confirmations of GR, as well as arousing substantial interest in topics related to gravitation. However, to understand present and future discoveries, it is convenient to look to the past, to the classical tests of GR, namely, the deflection of light by the Sun, the perihelion precession of Mercury, and the gravitational redshift of light." [arxiv.org]

@AnonySchmoose Anyone with access to Wikipedia can edit it. I edited the article on Don Bolles, the reporter. To see all the bs in the cosmology info requires a degree in physics.

First paragraph:

1. observational evidence is not the required laboratory evidence.
2. light does not bend in gravitational fields. It refracts or disperses.
3. gravitation does not cause redshift. When light strike particles of matter, the light loses some of its energy and “looks” less red. Some of us call it “tired light.”

Second paragraph:

1. Physics requires laboratory evidence and there is none for “the best available description of gravity”.
2. The ratio of signal-to-noise is too low to justify a claim for gravitational waves. ( i.e., there’s more noise than signal. )
3. Radio telescopes are not cameras and do not take photos. They send numeric data and the data were interpreted as a black hole.

There is truth in Wikipedia. To find it, do a search on Edwin Hubble and look for his commentary.

You have the smarts to understand the free PDF document you can download at the www.newtoeu.com website. Give it a try.

What is the motivation for all the misinformation? Billions of dollars and euros in taxpayer subsidies.

@yvilletom
However, the other quote is from a Cornell University professor from a peer reviewed paper, and it says basically the same.

@AnonySchmoose BTW, for info about Hawaii, go to www.ballotpedia.org and type “Hawaii ballot measures” in the search box.

@AnonySchmoose I visit Cornell U for its law library.and download SCOTUS rulings.

Re the Cornell professor, paychecks have clout. I’m retired and don’t have a paymaster. Download and read the PDF if you want to.

@yvilletom
I read the PDF document on electromagnetic and plasma science research, and am interested in it too. I posted an article in 2019 about plasma fueled rocket engine R&D, so that proves I am interested.

@AnonySchmoose The peer review system serves important purposes most of the time, such as to prevent fraud in scientific endeavors. I posted the following statement by a reputable source in the Academic category.

“The peer review system is satisfactory during quiescent times, but not during a revolution in a discipline such as astrophysics, when the establishment seeks to preserve the status quo.” ......Hannes Alfven.

Yes, I agree.
Dogs are totally amazing, and their love is as real as human love.
Diamonds are the hardest, yet are weak, and can't love.

@AnonySchmoose

Diamonds don’t love but they do pay the rent and buy the food.

some moments of incredible bad taste, but non the less a classic

Some.. I prefer blue topaz or amethyst.