What causes Gravity?

thespeculator · Apr 24, 2006

Title says it all... What causes gravity? I don't care if your answer is opinionated, or pure speculation. Gravity is one of those forces that is "just there" without explination... I think gravity would be a wonderful force to use for energy, but to use it there must be a way to alter it, and to alter it you need to know what causes it. So, what causes it?

kmarinas86 · Apr 24, 2006

It could be a relativistic correction of space-time due to the attractive electromagnetic force that extends beyond the surface of a planet, moon, or star. The speed of a clock depends on the strength of the gravitational field. Time dilation may just be the effect that an electric field (not magnetic) has on the conductance of a medium.

kyle_baron · Apr 24, 2006

Title says it all... What causes gravity? Precise answer: Mass Imprisise answer: Matter What exactly is Gravity? No one knows for sure. Physicists think it's a hypothetical particle called a Graviton, that moves at the speed of light. Also, because they think it's a particle, it can also be viewed as a wave. Several experiments are going on right now around the world (and in the future space) to find these gravitational waves. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

vogon13 · Apr 24, 2006

The explanation for the advancement of the perihelion of Mercury also implies gravity can cause gravity. Weird, huh? {The gravitational field of the sun can be considered to represent a great deal of energy. Mass is equivalent to energy via Einstein's famous equation, and mass possessess gravity, so a gravitational field has a gravitational field of its' own} <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

jschaef5 · Apr 24, 2006

"Mass is equivalent to energy via Einstein's famous equation" I thought that e=mc^2 means that for a particular amount of mass it's maximum energy is m*c^2 not that mass and energy are the same thing but more that they can be converted or something. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

vogon13 · Apr 24, 2006

Equivalent as in a 6 ounce delicious chocolate frosted donut (matter version) encounters its' antimatter counterpart and they are both totally mutually zorched, the resultant donutitic gravitational field still exists although it is now vastly more dilute as it is induced from the expanding fireball of gamma radiation, so to a gravitically induced field. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

thespeculator · Apr 25, 2006

A graviton huh?... That sounds rediculous to me because then What gives that graviton its attractive properties?..... Waves sounds a bit better, but waves have a beginning. Something causes a chain reaction and the chain reaction is the wave... What would cause that chain reaction?... What is the difference between a magnetic pull and gravity?... Could they be caused by the same thing?.... If they are caused by the same thing that would be cool because then it might actually be possible to reverse gravity....... It's really a perplexing subject though.

kyle_baron · Apr 25, 2006

A graviton huh?... Yeah, a Graviton. Which is a FORCE particle (like a photon) not a matter particle. That sounds rediculous to me because then What gives that graviton its attractive properties?..... It sounds rediculous to me too. However, keep in mind that particles SPIN as they move. That might have something to do with its attractive properties. Waves sounds a bit better, but waves have a beginning. Something causes a chain reaction and the chain reaction is the wave... What would cause that chain reaction?... I don't think of it as a chain reaction. ALL elementary particles from an electron to a molecule exist as waves because of Quantum Mechanics. This was proven many times with the 2 slit light experiments using photons, electrons, atoms, and molecules. What is the difference between a magnetic pull and gravity?... Electromagnetic pull is 100x stronger than gravity. Think of a simple magnet stuck to a refrigerator overcoming the entire mass of the earth! Could they be caused by the same thing?.... If they are caused by the same thing that would be cool because then it might actually be possible to reverse gravity....... It's really a perplexing subject though. Who knows? Nobody knows. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

jschaef5 · Apr 25, 2006

"Electromagnetic pull is 100x stronger than gravity." Doesn't that depend on the distance between the two? Gravity seems to have a larger effect at greater distances. String theory has tried to combined the theories of gravity and electricity and magnitism and also the weak and strong forces. String theory is pretty fascinating from what I have learned about it. Maybe within the next century string theory or super string theory (whatever they call it nowadays) will take off and develope more and actually get some proof behind it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

kyle_baron · Apr 25, 2006

"Electromagnetic pull is 100x stronger than gravity." Ooops, my Bad. I misread page 12 from The Elegant Universe. That should read: The Strong Force (that holds quarks, neutrons and protons together) is 100x stronger than the electromagnetic force. Now, getting back to the subject, I read on p. 12 that the electromagnetic force is 10 to the 42 power, times stronger than gravity! He goes on to say that the only reason the electromagnetic force does not overwhelm gravity in the world around us is that most things are composed of equal amounts of + and - electrical charges whose forces cancel each other out. Doesn't that depend on the distance between the two? Gravity seems to have a larger effect at greater distances. No, just the opposite is true. Gravity has a lesser effect at greater distances. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Saiph · Apr 25, 2006

kyle beat me to it, though I do think the "gravity having larger effect at greater distances" was supposed to be in comparison to electricity, not in general. the reason gravity is stronger of longer distances, is because of electromagnetisms self-negating behavior. Gravity gets stronger the more and more mass you put together. Gravity acts to concentrate mass, so it tends to make itself stronger. Electrical forces require a seperation in charge. The stronger the seperation, the stronger the force. However, the force exerted works to reduce charge seperation (positive attracts negative). So if you did have a chunk of charge able to rival the reach of earths gravity...it would quickly negate itself as it attracts all the opposite charge over a huge volume..and then you don't have the charge anymore. For proof of electricities strength over gravity, take a balloon, rub it on your head, and stick it to the ceiling. It stays there with what little charge you stuck to it from your hair, despite the entire mass of earth pulling on it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

thespeculator · Apr 26, 2006

When did this get into electromagnetism?... Electromagnetism is caused by the spiral flow of electrons through a coiled wire or other medium. What gives the electron its negative charge and attraction is a more accurate question towards my topic.... It seems strange to me that gravity seems to be the only force of attraction that is not accompanied by a repelling force. For a spinning particle to only attract particles, all sides would have to be spinning away from that particle right? (I'm thinking of a ball) How is that possible?.... Does it have an orbit (that's the only way I can think that would make it possible)? If so, the force would be a pulse because it would lessen when the particle starts coming closer to whatever its attracting. Also, if so, What would it be orbiting around?.... Is gravity simply from the electrons orbit around the nucleus of an atom?

mvisvitae · Apr 26, 2006

Dont forget about nuetrinos. Each nuetrino can exist in 4 different places at the same time and they are charged particles....Scientists have captured them with this huge machine they keep under water.....Perhaps it may be possible that the nuetrino stream which is constant has something to do with gravity.....and perhaps gravity could be related to the six quarks (the smallest part of each atom)....

why06 · Apr 26, 2006

Its hard to say....hmmm...What if a large body like Earth displaced spacetime-you know like an air pocket in water. Because space-time could not fill the gap matter does-just like air bobbles combine in the water to generate more lift-dilation-and how one bubble tends to draw other bubbles-gravity. In this description the bubble is a displacement in time. The air is say a planet and the attractive force is gravity. time dialation is how fast the bubble moves up to the surface because it has gained lifting force. No offence... I like to compare regular ordinary things to my ideas to make them easier to understand-sorry if this complicated things And of course this has no mathematical backing yet Itjust an idea. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ </div><div><ul><li>your move...</li></ul></div> </div>

why06 · Apr 26, 2006

This would also explain why magnetic feilds effect matter, but barely move spacetime. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ </div><div><ul><li>your move...</li></ul></div> </div>

thespeculator · Apr 27, 2006

Your model with the bubbles is kinda backwards. Water is polar. So it is the waters attraction to other water molecules that combines the bubbles, and not the bubbles attraction to eachother. The water itself tries to organise and compact the bubbles into one area because when the air is in only one centralized spot, it is not disturbing as many magnetic bonds between the water molecules as it would if it were spread out in many bubbles. If you had a gallon of air that weighed .05Lbs displacing a gallon of water that weighed 8Lbs you get 7.95Lbs of lift from bouyancy. There is no bouyancy without gravity or an external attracting force. Although the bubbles would combine without gravity because of the magnetic properties of water. I like to compare regular ordinary things to ideas to make them easier to understand also. It's interesting how little we know about attraction. We know it's there and that's about the jist of it. What causes negative to be attracted to positive? and What causes two of the same pole to repel eachother? would your answer be that they have fields. Because then I would ask: fields of what? a distortion field in spacetime?... Seems fairly logical but I don't completely grasp the concept of 'spacetime' yet... So many (possibly) important questions that are unanswered to human kind.... My mind is totally perplexed with how we can even exist. It's so mind numbingly illogical that there is even such thing as a universe, let alone life within it intelligent enough to piece things together. How can there be a logical explination for something so illogical? The universe is all composed of simplicities put together to form a huge complexity. It was probably formed from a simple chain reaction that was initiated by some random event (not a big or major event either)... Sorry for my ramblings. Back to the subject I guess. So what causes gravity? or I actually should have said: What causes attractive prope

igorsboss · Apr 29, 2006

The first explination that I found was an aetherist theory about a flow of aether into all matter, and the flow pushes us down toward the matter.... Which begs the question; What makes aether attracted to matter? The following is a speculation. It is already known that virtual particles come into and go out of existence everywhere, continuously, in ordinary space. Suppose that these tiny virtual particles can collide with physical particles, and each collision deflects the path of the physical particles slightly. The physical particles would experience motion similar to brownian motion, but on a tiny scale. Further, suppose that mass somehow consumes these virtual particles. Whenever a virtual particle strays too close to some mass, any mass, it is anihilated. It seems to me that the virtual particles would experience a bulk fluid-like flow, and the direction and power of this flow is described by general relativity. The force of gravity, then, is merely the pressure difference of these virtual particles pushing on ordinary particles. Essentially, ordinary particles are swept up in the bulk flow of virtual particle fluid, and the motion of the virtual particle fluid makes the universe appear to be warped (according to general relativity.)

kyle_baron · May 5, 2006

It seems strange to me that gravity seems to be the only force of attraction that is not accompanied by a repelling force. Actually, gravity is always an attractive force. And under extreme conditions of density, temperature, and pressure it is a REPELLING FORCE. That is the arguement for BB Theory. In the chapter Deconstructing the Bang p.277 in The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene. The next logical question would be: What would squeeze the matter/energy past the critical balancing point, where gravity is attractive and accumulative, to a smaller space, where pressure takes over and causes a repelling force? My answer would be, another dimension. It would be like squeezing all the matter in a blackhole from all angles instantaneously, to it's implosion point (not necessarily to a quantum singularity). There you have it, the mystery is solved! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

dragon04 · May 6, 2006

The speed of a clock depends on the strength of the gravitational field. Time dilation may just be the effect that an electric field (not magnetic) has on the conductance of a medium. How would that apply in the case of a mechanical clock that uses stored kinetic energy in its mainspring, rather than electrical means? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!". </div>

kmarinas86 · May 6, 2006

kmarinas86: The speed of a clock depends on the strength of the gravitational field. Time dilation may just be the effect that an electric field (not magnetic) has on the conductance of a medium. Dragon04: How would that apply in the case of a mechanical clock that uses stored kinetic energy in its mainspring, rather than electrical means? It would affect the flux everything in the area, from movement of the spring to our perception of it via electrochemical reactions in our brain. In other words, it affects the local time rate. Nothing unusual (of the time kind) is to be observed nearby. However, the gravitational time dilation persists.

thespeculator · May 11, 2006

I, for some reason find mulitidementions not plausible in that way. It just doesn't sound believable to me... Thank you for showing me that there is a repelling force with gravity though. Although in my mind it seems more as though gravity is simply shut off at that density. Probably due to the decontruction of the quantum mechanics of each atom (ie. all of the atoms are being crushed into their smallest form (energy) which would then repel outwards). What do you think?

kyle_baron · May 12, 2006

I, for some reason find mulitidementions not plausible in that way. It just doesn't sound believable to me... It's only plausible, until you look at the alternative: Infinite mass and density within a zero volume, or no space? This is the standard BB Theory. You and I, and everyone else know that this is all speculation. The only thing we can do is educate ourselves, then pick and choose what to believe, and what not to believe. And everyone is different in that respect. Although in my mind it seems more as though gravity is simply shut off at that density. With matter, gravity doesn't shut off. However, it could be switching from attractive to repulsive when the matter starts moving in the opposite direction. Probably due to the decontruction of the quantum mechanics of each atom (ie. all of the atoms are being crushed into their smallest form (energy) which would then repel outwards). I agree that would be the simplest explanation. But a physicist would say that crushing the matter to it's smallest form (Planck Length 10 -33cm) would create a gravitational field with repulsive gravity. An example of repulsive gravity is Einstein's Cosmological Constant, the so called Dark Energy causing the acceleration of the universe. Another example, is the inflation field of the universe, at the begining. I used the example of an imploding-exploding super nova, as an example in a previous thread on gravity. Imploding (attractive) Exploding (repelling). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

What causes Gravity?

thespeculator

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

kyle_baron

Guest

vogon13

Guest

jschaef5

Guest

vogon13

Guest

thespeculator

Guest

kyle_baron

Guest

jschaef5

Guest

kyle_baron

Guest

Saiph

Guest

thespeculator

Guest

mvisvitae

Guest

why06

Guest

why06

Guest

thespeculator

Guest

igorsboss

Guest

kyle_baron

Guest

dragon04

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

thespeculator

Guest

kyle_baron

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page