universal time clock?

[siriusdogstarone]

<p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">Yes,gravity does slow things down hadn't thought of that .&nbsp; </font></p><p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">Gravity&nbsp; has&nbsp; a function&nbsp; of holding things together like planets , but</font></p><p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">gravity comes from magnetisim that forms the&nbsp; gravitational fields .</font></p><p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">It acts like a net&nbsp; holding time back&nbsp; or constricting its flow .</font></p><p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">time cannot really escape gravity per se , but has to abide&nbsp; by it's</font></p><p><font size="3" color="#0000ff">gravitational laws of physics .<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-cool.gif" border="0" alt="Cool" title="Cool" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-innocent.gif" border="0" alt="Innocent" title="Innocent" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-surprised.gif" border="0" alt="Surprised" title="Surprised" /></font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#339966">E To The Square</font> </div>

 

[SpeedFreek]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Gravity&nbsp; has&nbsp; a function&nbsp; of holding things together like planets , but gravity comes from magnetisim that forms the gravitational fields.<br /> Posted by siriusdogstarone</DIV></p><p>Why do you think that "gravity comes from magnetism" ?&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000">_______________________________________________<br /></font><font size="2"><em>SpeedFreek</em></font> </p> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Why do you think that "gravity comes from magnetism" ?&nbsp; <br />Posted by <strong>SpeedFreek</strong></DIV><br /><br />He's been listening to a certain Inuit "scholar" ????</p><p><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>He's been listening to a certain Inuit "scholar" ???? <br />Posted by Mee_n_Mac</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;Or perhaps he simply hasn't been listening at all.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[dabiznuss]

Did some one&nbsp;just say that gravity comes from magnetism ?&nbsp; please don't kill my POST!!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Say for example the universe expands all the way until the atoms begin to get ripped apart by the expansion, would that then happen&nbsp; in one region first? I don't think it would, although differentgalaxy's and clusters of galaxies are different sizes, i don't think their size and structure would play any role at all b/c it is the space in-between them that is causing this effect!!! Posted by <strong>dabiznuss</strong></DIV></p><p>So far as I know I don't see the continuing expansion of the Universe ripping apart atoms.&nbsp; The expansion, if it's even happening at small scales, seems to be counterbalanced byu "gravity".&nbsp; I expect certain parts of the sky to go dark as galaxies in that direction expand past our event horizon.&nbsp; I' m not sure if the stars in our galaxy will be thusly effected though eventually I expect them to go dark as all the fuasable H and He are used up.</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>We do not have a formula for which the law of conservation&nbsp; of gravity will take place, unless the system is spatially isolated. This will eventually be achieved due to the expansion of the universe. The conservation of energy and mass should decrease greatly, b/c of the negative gravitational potential energy. The total mass & energy of the observable universe is greater when systems of gravitation are farther apart than when they are closer. Yet this still does not provide us with any crucial implications. Yet, with a lower total Mass-energy its rotational motion should increase, and continue to increase.... than there could be a point when the system starts to emit signals at an ever increasing rate possible to the point of 10^-43 sec. obviously at this point it would become a black-hole, but wait.......<u>Since the light it is emitting (the photon's) have no place to go and there would be a decrease in power drawn from the source.</u> So a black hole would not be attained yet something very strange would have to take place... I don't know what&iquest; <br />Posted by <strong>dabiznuss</strong></DIV><br /><br />I don't understand the underlined. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>(my attempts to not let the thread die a magnetic death) <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[siriusdogstarone]

Well I think gravity comes from magnetsim because that is what attracts and repels objects .
Like it keeps us from falling off this planet 's surface it hold us in place .
magnetism attacts objects and we are made up minerals and water , the earth which binds things together .

 

[MeteorWayne]

Welcome to Space.com.

Your intepretation is 100% totally incorrect, though. Gravity never repels objects.

 

[DrRocket]

Welcome to Space.com.

Your intepretation is 100% totally incorrect, though. Gravity never repels objects.

You are correct that his interpretation is completely wrong. Your reason is also valid, but it is but one reason why his interpretation is wrong.

We'll stick with classical elelctrodynamics and Newtonian mechanics in what is said below.

Gravity affects particles whether they are charged or not. Not all particles are subject to the electromagnetic force, only those that carry electric charge.

The effect of the magnetic field on moving charged particles is dependent on their velocity, as seen in the Lorentz force equation. Velocity is not a factor in gravitational force.

Gravitational fields are determined by mass. Electromagnetic fields are determined by charge and velocity of charge. The electrostatic field of an electron and proton are equal in magnitude (but opposite in direction) despite a tremendous difference in mass.

Gravitational fields are conservative. Electromagnetic fields are generally not conservative.

In short there is no obvious connection between gravity and electromagnetism. While it is believed that a unified theory may exist it has not yet been found. It certainly does not just fall out of the classical theories that describe everyday experience.