(Alternate thread title. "F***ing magnets! How do they work?")
James has an idea of how the sun and moon are kept in place. Apparently Tom Bishop supports it, even though neither of them have demonstrated even the slightest inkling of understanding on just what the hell they're talking about.
When light shines on a metal surface at a certain wavelength, the surface emits a burst of electrons. When large enough lights do this on the surface of a large enough metal surface, they adopt the function of massice discs, the continuous stream of electrons keeps them aloft above the plate.
I asked him how this could be and proposed the consequences of if it were true:
So the Earth is becoming more and more positive, while the sun and moon are somehow being bombarded with enough electrons to hold them up, grow incredibly negative? You realize the charge difference would create either sun/moon-to-Earth lightning or (if there's no medium to move through) they'd both act like gigantic magnets and attract each other?
You're forgetting the Earth's magnetic field
Apparently I, the only person with an
active thread on the subject (which is conveniently ignored by FEers), am somehow forgetting the Earth's magnetic field. Well, let's try to go through James's hypothesis logically.
There's the simplified FE model. Here's how the photoelectric effect would work were Earth the "massice" metal slab James seems to think it is.
Notice the electrons being scattered about randomly? James seems to think enough of those electrons are coming directly back into the sun to HOLD IT ABOVE THE CONSTANTLY ACCELERATING EARTH. Just for the sake of going too far, let's go on and presume that's somehow possible.
Notice how the sun is now being bombarded with electrons, while the Earth is losing them at an equal rate?
This means the sun is becoming increasingly negative as the Earth is becoming increasingly positive. We can't forget that opposing charges attract.
So the sun and Earth attract each other indefinitely, and
with forever increasing force. It would have to because, in order to remain suspended, the sun must continually be hit by these electrons, which are given off by the Earth. What happens when they get so close that Earth's atmosphere can act as a medium to allow this charge to return?
COSMIC LIGHTNING. 
More points to consider:
The moon must do this as well, meaning it must emit light of equal or greater energetic frequencies than the sun. This would also make the sun and moon HIGHLY OPPOSE EACH OTHER, as they would both be growing more negative indefinitely. Even if, for the sake of argument, the moon was capable of putting out such energy for such a long time, where does it get that energy from? According to James, "it eats itself," which is pure and total idiocy that only pushes the problem back one step further.
Additionally, there would be no life as we know it. Positive ions would be pulled up into the sky towards the negative celestial bodies (repelled by the positive earth below), while negative ions would be pulled down towards the ground (repelled by the negative celestial bodies above). Literally anything with a net dipole moment would orient itself vertically. Not only do we observe
no such distinctions or phenomena, it would make the formation of cells as we understand it completely impossible.
So, where did I forget Earth's magnetic field? Well, on a flat planet, there is
no working configuration of magnetic field lines that demonstrates what we observed experimentally through the simple use of compasses and the viewing of the respective northern and southern aurorae near the poles. So until I'm shown how electromagnetic field lines can be configured on a flat planet while still keeping with observed phenomena, the book on photoelectric suspension is closed.