Gravitation or gravity

[EarthlingX]

Wiki : Gravitation

Gravitation, or gravity, is one of the four fundamental interactions of nature (along with the strong force, electromagnetism and the weak force), in which objects with mass attract one another.[1]

science.howstuffworks.com : What is antigravity? (with video)

by Robert Lamb

From the hoverboards of "Back to the Future" to the gravity guns of "Half-Life 2," science fiction is peppered with antigravity technology. In the real world of peer-reviewed studies, corporate-funded labs and general relativity, however, "antigravity" is a dirty word.

Antigravity technology would revolutionize space exploration and energy production. It would slash the energy demands of travel and transportation. First, however, we'd just have to drastically alter our understanding of physics and figure out how to counter the most powerful force in the universe.

Understanding: Gravity
(video)
Gravity is a property of matter and space. The more mass, the more the space around the mass is warped.

From the lost records in Unexplained section :

It is the bending of space time caused by mass.

Gravity is what happens when objects follow straight paths in curved spacetime.

Gravity is an expression of mass in Spacetime.

As John Archibald Wheeler once coined, "Matter tells space how to curve. Space tells matter how to move."

I intend to drop a video or two later, when and if i stumble upon something appropriate, but if you have anything to add, please do so. As for answering questions, i might not be the best source, but hopefully this topic will lure in other more knowledgeable people, and save me from 'Unexplained' ... :roll:

I will also add links to related threads, but you can too.

 

[EarthlingX]

http://www.nytimes.com : A Scientist Takes On Gravity

By DENNIS OVERBYE

Published: July 12, 2010

It’s hard to imagine a more fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of life on the Earth than gravity, from the moment you first took a step and fell on your diapered bottom to the slow terminal sagging of flesh and dreams.

But what if it’s all an illusion, a sort of cosmic frill, or a side effect of something else going on at deeper levels of reality?

So says Erik Verlinde, 48, a respected string theorist and professor of physics at the University of Amsterdam, whose contention that gravity is indeed an illusion has caused a continuing ruckus among physicists, or at least among those who profess to understand it. Reversing the logic of 300 years of science, he argued in a recent paper, titled “On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton,” that gravity is a consequence of the venerable laws of thermodynamics, which describe the behavior of heat and gases.

“For me gravity doesn’t exist,” said Dr. Verlinde, who was recently in the United States to explain himself. Not that he can’t fall down, but Dr. Verlinde is among a number of physicists who say that science has been looking at gravity the wrong way and that there is something more basic, from which gravity “emerges,” the way stock markets emerge from the collective behavior of individual investors or that elasticity emerges from the mechanics of atoms.

Gravity is the thermodynamic limit of the statistical mechanics of “atoms of space-time.”

http://www.physorg.com : Revised theory of gravity doesn't predict a Big Bang

July 12, 2010

By Lisa Zyga

(PhysOrg.com) -- The Big Bang theory has formed the basis of our understanding of the universe's origins since it was first proposed in 1927 by Georges Lemaitre. And for good reason: the theory is supported by scientists' latest observations and experiments, and is based on Einstein's widely accepted theory of general relativity. But scientists are always on the lookout for any evidence that might suggest an alternative to the Big Bang. The latest in this area of research comes from astrophysicists Maximo Banados and Pedro Ferreira, who have resurrected a theory of gravity from the early 20th century and discovered that a modified version of the theory may hold some surprises.

More information: Maximo Banados and Pedro G. Ferreira. “Eddington’s Theory of Gravity and Its Progeny.” Physical Review Letters 105, 011101 (2010). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.011101

 

[MeteorWayne]

This is drifting out of the Science 101 category, and there are multiple discussions on this topic in other fora like Physics, and SS&A. So I will lock this for now, and soon insert links to the other discussions.

Until I do so, check out those fora.