Using the same simple claim of our theory, it should be easier to understand the cause of anti-gravity. When approaching the Earth from outer space, the space becomes increasingly contracted.

When the Moon is positioned above the USA then the space between that area of the Earth and the Moon becomes even further contracted

This happens because there is more mass above USA that has to share the space that is available. Therefore more space is needed, so more space will have to be 'pulled in' towards the USA region.

More space can only be 'fetched' if there is a greater contraction of the space that already exists between the Moon and the USA area. There is nothing other than the Moon in a position to ‘fetch’ such space. Therefore the Moon pulls in towards the USA area the extra space that is needed, from the solar system, in order to accommodate both the Earth and the Moon.

When matter pulls in space, conversely space pulls in matter. This also means that the moon pulls itself in the opposite direction of the Earth, (antigravity).

However, the moon is held in its position (orbit) by the space which exists at its precise location, where the space due to the Earth’s and the moon's force of attraction is more strongly contracted. 

Contracted space can be compared to vacuum. Both the Moon and the Earth 'consumes' space. That's why the Moon is stronger tied to the contracted space between it self and the Earth, - than to the attachment to outer space (the antigravity, mentioned above).

What we see is a contribution by the moon to the common gravitational field of the Earth Moon system. The collective strength of the earth-moon gravitational force increases due to the moons force of repulsion.

One can say that all matter on the Earth, or within the Earth’s gravitational field, is responsible for ‘acquiring’ the space which is needed for its ‘own existence’. But this also gives rise to a repulsive force, which paradoxically increases the strength of the moon's, and Earth's common field of gravitation.

Every stone on the surface of the Earth repels the Earth with exactly the same force with which the stone itself contracts/pulls on space.

One may therefore ask, why does the Earth not explode? To answer this question, one should go back to the two previous chapters which explain that space increasingly contracts in a direction toward the centre of a gravitational field. The forces of contraction are united through a common centre of gravity. The forces of repulsion, however, do not share such a common property.

Since a stone (or the moon) pulls space inwards, such objects will be attracted  in the direction that the contraction of space increases, and hence be attracted to Earth.

It’s apparent, absurd, and a confusing paradox that all objects on the Earth contribute to a common field of gravity with a force, which in reality, drives their own repulsion. Because this is not what we normally experience.  But remember dark energy shows that anti gravity is  a reality, this theory could show us the right track.

If we imagine the Earth as ball cut into 10 cake-like pieces, each piece would contribute 10 % of the Earths gravity. Each of the pieces has to pull 10 % of the Earth’s total amount of contracted space together. Collectively the full (100%) field of gravity is achieved.  Each of the pieces do work, since each of them 'acquire' and contract space.

Space will resist contraction, so we can also say; space pulls the Earth inwards 100%. That is; space pulls in each of the 10 pieces of Earth with 10% of the total gravitational field strength. Each piece therefore has anti gravity, or a repulsive force, of 10 % of the Earth’s force of gravity. Remember, gravity is nothing more than the extent to which space is being contracted.

Now one should imagine that each of the pieces just simply disappears or explodes into outer space. But the 10 pieces collectively form a common field of gravity of 100% proportional with the total mass, due to the fact that each of the pieces pull space, not only from the outer periphery, but also from the centre of the mass.

The force of anti-gravity does not have a common ability to unite with other forces of anti-gravity. Therefore, the force of repulsion, in this example is 10 times weaker than the force of gravity. Even if we imagine that half of the mass of the Earth would resist the force of gravity, the force of repulsion would only be half that to the Earths force of gravity.

Space is elastic; it has to be under the influence of a force in order to expand, as well as, contract.

The moon contracts the space surrounding it; this creates a link between the moon and the space under the influence of its gravitational force. In other words; the moon is woven into the elastic space where it is situated.

One would therefore assume that the moon, due to its attachment to the elastic space, might fall more slowly toward the Earth than a much lighter object which does not have the same attachment. This is not what happens. All objects, light and heavy, always fall with the same speed.

The explanation of this could maybe lie hidden in Newton’s gravitation formula.

Newton’s formula shows that there must be considerably more force to pull the moon down to the Earth than the force needed to pull an apple to the Earth.

Newton’s formula of gravitation seems to indirectly support the notion that a body is linked to the space under its curvature influence. And further, that when matter is situated inside a gravitational field, a force of repulsion must exist which is proportional to the matters mass. This fact and the connection between space and matter supports observation that greater objects require stronger forces to pull them to Earth.

Imagine an apple (0.1 kg) circling in the orbit plane of the Moon. The force of gravity between the Earth and the Moon is much greater than the force between the Earth and such an apple.

Attachment to Space   <    >   Attraction of Gravity

Any object is attached to space with a well defined attachment strength.   This strength must be proportional to the mass of the object.

Gravity attraction proportional : 1   Gravity attraction proportional : 2   Gravity attraction proportional : 5

This can be compared to the force it takes to move 5 bikes forward. This force will be 5 times greater than the force necessary to move 1 bike forward.   But because of the resistance is similarly 5 times greater, all the bikes move with the 'same' speed.     Or attachment to space, can be compared to parachutes slowing down the speed.

The only question remaining is; how it is possible to measure, and precisely understand the attachment of matter and space?