Gravity, like time, is magnitive; time is imperceptible and gravity is undetectable. Gravity exists, is undetectable and measurable. Gravity is such a weak force that it can not be detected with anything; we only see its effects on bodies.
I imagine it is quite a feat to measure something that is undetectable!Gravity exists, is undetectable and measurable.
Explain magnitive again .
I imagine it is quite a feat to measure something that is undetectable!
Gravity isn't undetectable.
Throw yourself at the ground and you'll detect it.
You can use a bathroom scale to measure gravity. If you want to get a more precise idea of the local gravity you could use a Gravimeter.I think that perceiving and detecting are different. We perceive with the senses, devices detect.
You can use a bathroom scale to measure gravity. If you want to get a more precise idea of the local gravity you could use a Gravimeter.
By the same token, you might say that no device can detect electrical charge. We only see the effects of electrical charge.The bathroom scale measures the weight, a manifestation of gravity, but no device has detected the supposed gravitons. That's what I mean.
By the same token, you might say that no device can detect electrical charge. We only see the effects of electrical charge.
Would you say that electrical charge is "magnitive", too?
You're not comparing like and like there.GRAVITY
1- We can perceive and measure its effects (weight).
2- The supposed gravitons are not detectable (nature).
3- It is magnitive.
ELECTROMAGNETISM
1- We can perceive and measure its effects (attraction and repulsion).
2- There is evidence that electric charges exist. They are detectable.
3- It is not magnitive.
Given all this, I don't see how electromagnetism can be magnitive while gravity can't. It looks like you're applying your definitions inconsistently.
If all four fundamental forces in nature are magnitive, and those govern all interactions seen in nature, is there anything that isn't magnitive?
What use is this magnitive concept?
You say that magnitive means we have only indirect evidence of its existence.
What do you mean by indirect evidence, in this context?
We do not see or detect things in themselves, but their effects.
In the case of particles, they change their behavior when they are observed.
If true
Why is that ? Why do particles change their behaviour when observed ?
And if so , then you should be able to change it back to the behaviour it had before being observed .
river said: ↑
If true
Why is that ? Why do particles change their behaviour when observed ?
And if so , then you should be able to change it back to the behaviour it had before being observed .
I guess it's due to the nature of particles. Hopefully someone will answer that question.
The nature of particles is to change because of being observed ?