What makes gravity?
- Thread starter theorist-constant12345
- Start date
What do you think? This is a discussion board.
I don't know myself.
I don't know myself.
I am asking science, it is not my place to make assumptions or speculations.
"What mechanism" is not a physics question¹ when talking about fundamental physical theories.
Since general relativity is the currently most accurate description of behavior of gravity,² we can interpret Einstein's equation to say that matter, energy, pressure, momentum and stress all act like a source of space-time curvature which means that
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/einstein/einstein.pdf
¹ http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html @ 17, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...cist-explains-why-science-not-about-certainty , http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/warning.html , and https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html
² http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/
Since general relativity is the currently most accurate description of behavior of gravity,² we can interpret Einstein's equation to say that matter, energy, pressure, momentum and stress all act like a source of space-time curvature which means that
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/einstein/einstein.pdf
¹ http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html @ 17, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...cist-explains-why-science-not-about-certainty , http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/warning.html , and https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html
² http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/
Last edited:
From your link -
''General relativity explains gravity as the curvature of spacetime. It’s all about geometry. ''
I was not asking about any of the actions of gravity on matter, I was asking what is the cause? In the article link I provided it mentions a graviton, so does all matter contain gravitons?
Gravitons have yet to be be verified.
If they do exist at all.
If they do exist at all.
So the answer is science does not really know at this time?
As was mentioned.
Other than that, gravity remains a mystery.
The effect we call gravity exhibits itself when mass/energy warps/curves space-time.
Why or how that happens we do not really know.
Gravitons are hypothetical particles that transmits the "force" of gravity in the framework of quantum theory.
Ok thank you for the information, I can not expand on what has been said, I dare not.
If you continue on this course, you will receive additional infraction points. Sentence one of my post already explained that you are asking bad questions, but I have edited that post to support my claims with multiple sources.
I don't think people mind if you actually try to learn. What they mind is you spouting nonsense/trolling.
You cannot.
Any "expansion" by you would be unscientific crap.
It's reasonably common knowledge... :shrug:
Science does not know everything, but at this time it has done an excellent job in explaining what we do know about the Universe around us.
Just please, pretty please, don't insult us by manufacturing a reason/methodology as to what you believe gravity is or arises from.
I quote you my link I provided, if it is not a Physics question, then why are Physicists researching it?
''Gravity is one the four fundamental forces of the universe and is considered a noncontact force. It is what holds the planets in orbit as well as the very universe itself. It is what keeps us from floating off into space and plays a crucial role in almost every nature process from the ocean tides to the body’s circulatory system. However what causes gravity? What is the mechanism that makes it work? Physicists have only partially answered this question. The first person to comprehensively describe it was Isaac Newton.''
If Coulombs's law stands universally, we should assume that every atom or charged particle are connected by their force field across the whole space.
An atoms force field does not end at atom radius, but extend to infinity. In whole, an atom or planet maybe electrically neutral, but Every charge within has its own force field beyond distance, those forces overlapped to produce chemical bonding, magnetism and gravity. Ever wonder why is Fe=q1q2/r^2, Fg=m1m2/r^2, and mass proportional to proton numbers within it?
An atoms force field does not end at atom radius, but extend to infinity. In whole, an atom or planet maybe electrically neutral, but Every charge within has its own force field beyond distance, those forces overlapped to produce chemical bonding, magnetism and gravity. Ever wonder why is Fe=q1q2/r^2, Fg=m1m2/r^2, and mass proportional to proton numbers within it?
Do you believe Physics leaves room for God? http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=54280.0
Science has never been absolute, what makes you think today's science is all correct? In fact, science is so fucked up. Present theories of atomic structure, gravity and light are all wrong.
Find answers at http://www.fuckedscience.com
Science has never been absolute, what makes you think today's science is all correct? In fact, science is so fucked up. Present theories of atomic structure, gravity and light are all wrong.
Find answers at http://www.fuckedscience.com
Damn, I might report something that isn't just an ad.
What you should remember is that although we may be ignorant to the why and how, it adequately explains why we don't float off the earth, and why the Earth does not float off into the void and every aspect of the solar system including BHs.
Our models also have enabled us to go into orbit, land on the Moon, send probes to every main body in the solar system, in fact in the case of Voyager, to meet up with four of the outer planets on one journey......to land on Mars, and land space craft on piddling little asteroids in the middle of nowhere.
And most of that has been done by using Newtonian mechanics...GR was not needed..
Your pop-science magazine article written by Some dude on the Internet is not in a position to impugn the scientific source who said hunting after a mechanism in the absence of evidence is fruitless. That's what Newton (also cited in your pop-physics article) meant when he wrote: "hypotheses non fingo".