Question Does energy have gravity?

[Fest3er]

Mass has gravity. If that mass is completely converted to energy, does that energy retain its gravity, or is the gravity converted to something else? If gravity is converted, would the loss of gravitational force in the Universe explain the acceleration of expansion, as more and more mass in the universe is converted to energy?

 

[Gibsense]

Energy and mass are connected and both can warp spacetime. The warping is gravity.
Gravitation is not lost by converting mass to energy. Nice try!

 

[Thermoman]

Mass has gravity. If that mass is completely converted to energy, does that energy retain its gravity, or is the gravity converted to something else? If gravity is converted, would the loss of gravitational force in the Universe explain the acceleration of expansion, as more and more mass in the universe is converted to energy?

Mass is a measure , the unit used is Kilogram .

Does a measure have gravity is none sequitar !

What causes the mass of an object is one form of energy known as elementary charge .

Gravity-A is simply the grounding process of charge . The work done is that the conserved charge of one particle is attracted to another particle .This can be observed by rubbing a balloon and sticking it to a brick wall !

 

[Greenlight]

i think so.
light causes gravity
and because the light moves away at the speed of light.
it shines from the inside of our visible universe to the outside.
and like a black hole nothing ever comes back once it leaves, because at a distance space/time expands away faster than light can travel.
our universe is going from high gravitational potential to low
and after the necessary Lorentz transformation i believe there would be no expansion. Just the appearance of it.

 

[Classical Motion]

Energy is just motion. Gravity is a potential. If a mass is accelerated by the potential, then that acceleration, that motion, is the energy caused by the gravity potential.

Mass is the motion of matter. Matter motion. Energy is ANY motion. We can add energy, motion, to matter. We can retrieve motion, energy, from matter.

Energy is any motion. Mass is matter motion. That’s why energy and mass can be ratio-ed.

The matter motion is called inertia. It’s an acceleration, a constant acceleration. It’s this acceleration, this internal acceleration, that opposes external acceleration. Inertia.

Inertia is NOT gravity. But both gravity and inertia are angular. And angular interaction is much different than linear interaction. Attraction, repulsion and balance are different. Because both are in states of acceleration, not just velocity.

Just a passing comment.

 

[Fest3er]

Energy and mass are connected and both can warp spacetime. The warping is gravity.
Gravitation is not lost by converting mass to energy. Nice try!

That makes sense. It explains gravitational lensing. If light (energy) had no gravity, it’s path wouldn’t bend as it passed a body of mass.

 

[billslugg]

Whether or not you have mass is irrelevant in determining how you move in warped space time. Warped spacetime viewed from inside appears perfectly normal. Everything moves in straight lines as viewed locally. Mass has nothing to do with it.

 

[Classical Motion]

Matter and mass can be completely dissolved of it’s EM energy. Anti matter can unwrap matter and their-selves completely and emit all EM, leaving an empty husk that has no field or rotation, called a neutrino. Once in a while a large stable field collector can detect one, as a field distortion as it passes thru. Giving different types of distortions. A family of neutrinos. Charge husks. Blanks. A GROUNDED state. A moving non momentum, hard to detect. Sub Quantum.

I think we could go faster than c, if we could find something faster to accelerate with.

How can we make a rate faster than the velocity? We do it easily with slow velocities. Using a c rate.

We need a faster rate. How about 2 X c?

Propagation expansion is 2 X c.

A c field moves at c in a radial direction. The expansion rate of the diameter of that radial field is 2 X c.

If we could detect that expansion, we would have a 2 X c rate. A few meters, a few nano seconds of expansion.

But how do we transfer a higher than c rate?

Interconnected expansions perhaps? Expansion computing, A.I now has more presence then we do.

Make a good story.

 

[magnoflux]

Interesting thought " A family of neutrinos. Charge husks. "
So the difference of weight of a negatron in anti matter and a proton in matter should be the weight of the husk which them matter and anti-matter annihilate spins on as a husk.
Can you sight an experiment to demonstrate this?

 

[Classical Motion]

For me, weight is not an amount of substance. Weight is the spin of a constant amount of substance. Spin it faster and it weighs more. All the spin has been removed from the husk. Therefore the husk is weightless. The husk has neither field nor mass. It can no longer interact with matter. It might distort a field at most.

Velocity without density has no energy. Empty motion. A sub atomic crumb.

It might take another 100 yrs. to paint an electron. But it would take a 1000 to paint a neutrino.

Neutrino, a no mass, no energy, entity. Cosmic Entropy. A conversion of useful to non useful.

Cosmic LOSS. An open system. A decay of both energy and mass.

Just supposition.

 

[magnoflux]

Anti matter can unwrap matter and their-selves completely and emit all EM, leaving an empty husk that has no field or rotation, called a neutrino.

But CM ,if 2 identical molecules of a substance meet and one is made of matter and the other anti-matter then they will annihilate completely and not emit any energy.
We must await the Parker probe result as it enters the suns upper atmosphere where it will be annihilated, to see how much EM radiation is left over in the husks, if any.

 

[billslugg]

If an electron and its antimatter equivalent, the positron, meet they will annihilate each other and two 0.511 MeV gamma ray photons will be emitted.

Two photons with a total energy of at least 1.022 MeV can join together to form an electron and a positron. This can only occur near a charged particle. This commonly occurs when a highly energetic photon passes near an atom, joins with a ubiquitous CMB photon, and forms a particle pair.

 

[Classical Motion]

I don’t believe we’ll ever find anti atoms or anti molecules. Only anti particles. I believe this to be true because anti matter is just regular matter that’s been temporarily inverted.

Normal matter is very asymmetrical in size. This prevents the particles from physically touching each other. If you shout a proton at an electron, the proton is so small, it flies right thru the center of the electron, never touching it.

Once in a while when some particles become inverted, then the particles have the same size. When they touch, they un-wrap each other of field with emission.

Annihilation is the act of converting all mass into energy. ALL the energy is emitted. Even the rest energy. Once done it’s dead. Never to return.

If the proton and the electron were the same size, all matter would begone long ago.

This is just my supposition, not modern science. It’s an old classical viewpoint.

Two photons will never make a charge. They are not able to rotate one another.

Even if you could add an empty husk, I doubt you could wind it up.

Just an after thought.