From point of view of a total amateur who does not understand half the things in your article, I would argue that you cannot call one direction gravitational repeller only because it doesnt pull as hard as the other directions (or doesnt exist at all) ? My common sense argues that only because one force is weaker or stagnant does’t mean that it actually repels stuff? It sounds to me like a convenient reasoning to prove a theory lacking real base.
I am trying to imagine this on two examples:
- Magnets: two magnets on each side of middle piece, one stronger than the other, even though piece goes to one direction, in fact the other direction is not actively repelling it
- We are all pulled by gravity on earth. If we imagine that something bigger comes along close enough to earth that would “beat” earths gravity (i do realize this is complete nonsense) , even though we would be flying, doesn’t mean that the earth is repelling us. Also (without the extra object) if we remove earths gravity, we will not be repelled away from it presumably. At best we would be pulled to next gravitational center or left floating without any pull?
But again, I really haven’t got deep understanding of all this, just trying to understand your article logically.