Valerijs Černohajev's Gravitational-Charge Dualism (GCD) framework proposes that all massive bodies carry a small excess negative charge — approximately one electron per 5×10¹⁷ protons — and derives planetary magnetic fields from this charge through orbital force balance. This paper implements and tests three models against measured Solar System magnetic fields: (1) Černohajev's explicit four-force orbital balance from Work No. 7, equating gravitational, Coulomb, centrifugal, and centripetal-magnetic forces; (2) the appendix charge-scaling formula from the same work, presented in its solar-anchored form and cross-referenced against the comprehensive planetary table in Work No. 11; and (3) a simplified spinning-charged-sphere model constructed independently using only Černohajev's charge ratio combined with standard electromagnetism. At the stated universal charge-to-mass ratio of 9. 57×10⁻¹¹ C/kg, Model 1 produces interplanetary magnetic fields of 10¹–10⁴ Tesla and a universal Coulomb-to-gravitational force ratio of 1. 23, implying net repulsion between Solar System bodies — in direct conflict with spacecraft magnetometer measurements by approximately twelve orders of magnitude. Model 2, anchored to Hₛun = 1. 66×10⁵ Oe, predicts Mercury's field to within 12% of the MESSENGER measurement when using Černohajev's tabulated charge values, but overpredicts gas giant fields by 30–230× and predicts measurable fields for Venus, Mars, and Pluto where none are observed. Model 3 predicts Mercury to within 7% but overpredicts gas giants by 20–150×. Mercury is the most accurately predicted body across all models — notable because it presents the greatest challenge for conventional dynamo theory. The paper additionally identifies an internal inconsistency at the framework's solar anchor: Work No. 7 and Work No. 11 give two solar surface field values differing by a factor of approximately 23, which propagates linearly into every downstream prediction and must be reconciled before the framework can be cleanly evaluated. Findings are reported in order of decisiveness: a framework-level falsifier (the FC/Fg > 1 result combined with absent multi-Tesla interplanetary fields), strong empirical failures (gas-giant overprediction, non-detections at Venus/Mars/Pluto), and internal-consistency problems (the solar anchor, the Mercury charge anomaly) that matter only if the framework otherwise survives. Some predictions succeed, others fail decisively, and the framework as written contains an anchor-point inconsistency that any future formal treatment must resolve. Černohajev's manuscripts are archived at cernohajev. omeka. net; this paper draws on Works No. 1, 7, and 11 in the consolidated English translation published as Engineering Infinity: Earth's First Interstellar Blueprint (CARI, Riga, 2024).
Gene Sticco (Tue,) studied this question.