Zetatalk Gravity: Insight or Insanity?

There seems to have been some confusion over my previous post.
My purpose is simple: to see if the Zetatalk theory meshes with
the real world, and, if so, how this meshing works. To this end,
I will quote Zetatalk theories and label them (ZT)-aka Zetatalk
Theory; I will also talk about human assumptions and label them
(HA)-aka Human Assumption. For clarity, I will also divide the
Zetatalk theory concerning gravity into two pieces. In part
one I will deal with the theory of particle gravity; in part
two I will deal with the theory of a repulsion force.

PART ONE: GRAVITY AS PARTICLES
If particle creates gravity (ZT), then this leaves us with
some interesting motion problems. Say for example an object
moves up or down with a constant velocity. If returning particles,
due to the time they spend upon and within the surface objects, 
and due to their continual direction of motion, are a mechanical
force (ZT), then the force exerted by these particles should
be related (by a constant?) to the time they spend within a mass,
the mass of an object, the speed that they travel through 
the mass, and the particle density. Thusly, I derived an equation
that should describe the force produced: Pd*Md*t*(Vg+Vo)=F where
Pd=Particle Density (can be considered constant over small
distances); Md=Mass Distance of object or simply Mass (nearly
constant at low velocity. I choose this terminology because 
I want to convey the idea that now matter how an object is 
rotated, gravity particles interact with the same mass and thus
exert the same force); t=time; Vg=velocity of Gravity particles
(as viewed from the object's frame of motion); Vo=Velocity of
Object (from earth's frame); and where F=Force. Thus with the
addition of a gravity constant G to make the units come out
we can mesh this mathematical description with Newton's Law (HA)
so that F=ma=Pd*m*t*(Vg+Vo)*G reducing to a=Pd*distance*G
(since distance=velocity*time).

What can we make of this mess? First, it shows that the 
acceleration of an object is constant regardless of its state of 
motion towards or away from gravity or its mass (in accordance
with human assumptions). Second, it shows that the force exerted
by particle gravity is dependent on distance and particle density,
which makes sense.

What about motion parallel to the surface of the earth? Imagine
a box moving at a constant velocity to the right along a level 
surface. Imagine a gravity particle hitting the box in the upper-
right corner at time t. Now the box advances a bit to the right
but gravity particle continues down in a straight line. Thus, any
moment after t, the gravity particle will no only have advanced
downward but also to the left with respect to the box. If we
equate force with gravity particle direction, then gravity is now
exerting a force down and TO THE LEFT on the box. The box's
motion is degraded. This is incorrect; it conflicts with
experience. The Zetatalk contention that gravity is composed
SOLELY of particles is wrong. However, if (in accordance with
quantum mechanics (HA)) we allow gravity particles to be viewed as 
both waves and particles, the contradiction disappears (think of
a huge light overhead--the intensity of light does not change
as we move one way or the other). Oddly, extending this reasoning
to include present human assumptions leads to the prediction that,
while still, we would see gravity particles as virtual, but when 
moving to either side we would see them as waves and therefore real.

PART TWO: GRAVITY AS BIPOLAR
Above I just examined the Zetatalk contention that gravity
is composed of particles while ignoring their theory that gravity
contains a repulsive component. According to Zetatalk
satellites... if far enough from the surface of a gravitational
giant such as a planet, find a down-draft and updraft of gravity
particles in balance, what humans might term in their ignorance
a zero gravity field, weightlessness.(ZT) But we would also term
falling of a cliff (in the absence of air resistance) weightlessness.
I find it hard to believe that if I fall off a cliff I will
find a down-draft and updraft of gravity particles in balance(ZT),
due largely to the fact that I am still accelerating implying
no balance of forces. This also violates the fundamental human
assumption that gravity cannot be separated from a constant
acceleration (equivalence principle).

Accoding to Kip Thorne at Caltech, Einstein's General Relativity
(which relies on a curvature of spacetime to create gravity)
has an equivalent formulation in which space is flat and our rulers
and clocks are rubbery (Einstein assumed they were not). But in the
flat space formulation of General Relativity what causes gravity?
The Zetatalk theory of gravity fills this hole nicely. Other
attempts to formulate a theory of quantum gravity must also
ultimately rely on particles (or strings).

If there is a repulsive force of gravity, then for our theories
to predict orbits so well they must use a RATIO between the
Zetatalk repulsive and attractive forces of gravity. Also Zetatalk
contends that Space travel is a irresistible kiss, and a quick
kiss, between two gravity attractors. This quick kiss is
achieved by turning off the repulsion force between two points,
and is a carefully controlled process.(ZT) I find two
problems with the above description. First, it implies that
the repulsive force can be subtracted out. But according
to human assumptions mass and energy cause a curvature of
spacetime with and thus gravity. The larger the energy and mass
concentrated at a given point in space the more gravity. By 
subtracting out the repulsion force, we also subtract out a
large amount of energy in a give unit of space. By human theories
and assumptions this should cause gravity to become LESS; by
the Zetatalk theory gravity should become MORE. It seems the
only way to reconcile this is to say that the repulsion force
causes a NEGATIVE curvature of space time. But it seems odd
that the same particle could cause two different curvatures
based solely on its direction in space (which is relative).
The second problem is Zetatalk states (in another section)
that The repulsion phenomena only manifests when, as we said,
the objects are of equal size, are free to move, and dominate
the immediate environment.(ZT) But if objects must be of equal
size how does the repulsion force affect a satellite (very small)
and a spacecraft (I assume to be relatively small)?

Thus, it seems that the Zetatalk concept of gravity as a particle
can be readily integrated with human assumptions. However, the
repulsive force cannot; we would have to change some of our
most basic beliefs (often scientifically verified) about the
universe.

Quantum Certainty

P.S. Ask for clarification if needed.