SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Gravity by nature is not a force itself, though it can be calculated as such.
Page 1 2 3 4 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Gravity by nature is not a force itself, though it can be calculated as such. Login/Join 
Do the next
right thing
Picture of bobtheelf
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ftttu:
quote:
Originally posted by bobtheelf:
What really bends my brain is this:

We usually visualize the curvature of spacetime as a result of mass with a 2-dimensional plane with a mass curving it in to a third dimension.

This implies that in "reality", mass that curves 4-dimensional spacetime actually curves it in to a 5th dimension.


That 2 dimensional plane is just a visual representation.



Hence why I said

quote:
We usually visualize the curvature of spacetime as a result of mass with a 2-dimensional plane with a mass curving it in to a third dimension.
 
Posts: 3666 | Location: Nashville | Registered: July 23, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
Why is gravity so cheap?

Because it's mass-produced.

Now Waterbury,

I was going to try to make more progress by commenting further on the genuinely intelligent contributions from screamingcokatoo, kkina, ftttu, jey, and rey, and right before I wasn't sure if I could pull it off, you dropped this, knocking me back to square one, knowing not how to proceed.

Maybe after a break I'll be able to think clearly again to see if I may contribute one last time before the IQ in the room increases any further.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Savor the limelight
posted Hide Post
What would happen if the Sun just disappeared? Would the planets immediately just go flying off into space?
 
Posts: 11017 | Location: SWFL | Registered: October 10, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of 229DAK
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by trapper189:
What would happen if the Sun just disappeared? Would the planets immediately just go flying off into space?
It would get very cold.


_________________________________________________________________________
“A man’s treatment of a dog is no indication of the man’s nature, but his treatment of a cat is. It is the crucial test. None but the humane treat a cat well.”
-- Mark Twain, 1902
 
Posts: 9058 | Location: Northern Virginia | Registered: November 04, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
As humans, we think we have a pretty good handle on laws of physics, gravity, space-time, astrophysics, and the like. Then we get some reality checks.

We can't seem to reconcile General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. In lay terms, the theory of the very big with the theory of the very small.

Even if we have concepts of regular matter down, we don't know much about the other "stuff". Many scientists believe that regular matter makes up only 5% of the universe, with 27% being dark matter, and 68% being dark energy. So far, nobody really knows what the 95% "other stuff" is.

Scientists generally believe the universe is 13.7 to 13.8 billion years old. But the width (if that's what we want to call it) of the universe is said to be 93 to 94 billion light years -- almost 7 times larger than the distance light can travel during this time. This implies that space itself has expanded at speeds multiple times the speed of light.

In some ways it's akin the parable of blind men describing an elephant after touching only a small portions of an elephant.
 
Posts: 7891 | Location: Colorado | Registered: January 26, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Shaman
Picture of ScreamingCockatoo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by fritz:
As humans, we think we have a pretty good handle on laws of physics, gravity, space-time, astrophysics, and the like. Then we get some reality checks.

We can't seem to reconcile General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. In lay terms, the theory of the very big with the theory of the very small.

Even if we have concepts of regular matter down, we don't know much about the other "stuff". Many scientists believe that regular matter makes up only 5% of the universe, with 27% being dark matter, and 68% being dark energy. So far, nobody really knows what the 95% "other stuff" is.

Scientists generally believe the universe is 13.7 to 13.8 billion years old. But the width (if that's what we want to call it) of the universe is said to be 93 to 94 billion light years -- almost 7 times larger than the distance light can travel during this time. This implies that space itself has expanded at speeds multiple times the speed of light.


First theory doesn't mean what you think it does. Theory is how it's applied to produce results from within a model.

The universe is so large from cosmic inflation, before the universe cooled enough to produce a limit on speed.





He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.
 
Posts: 39770 | Location: Atop the cockatoo tree | Registered: July 27, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of CQB60
posted Hide Post
Perhaps the most accurate approach would be to call gravity an "emergent force," meaning that what looks like a direct force is actually emerging from more fundamental effects (the warping of spacetime). With this in mind, it is perfectly reasonable to call gravity a real force.


______________________________________________
Life is short. It’s shorter with the wrong gun…
 
Posts: 13819 | Location: VIrtual | Registered: November 13, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
אַרְיֵה
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 229DAK:
quote:
Originally posted by trapper189:

What would happen if the Sun just disappeared?
It would get very cold.
Dark, too.



הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים
 
Posts: 30733 | Location: Central Florida, Orlando area | Registered: January 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Void Where Prohibited
Picture of WaterburyBob
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by wrightd:
quote:
Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
Why is gravity so cheap?

Because it's mass-produced.

Now Waterbury,

I was going to try to make more progress by commenting further on the genuinely intelligent contributions from screamingcokatoo, kkina, ftttu, jey, and rey, and right before I wasn't sure if I could pull it off, you dropped this, knocking me back to square one, knowing not how to proceed.

Maybe after a break I'll be able to think clearly again to see if I may contribute one last time before the IQ in the room increases any further.

While what I posted was in fact a joke, it goes right to the simplest explanation of gravity - the fundamental interaction which causes attraction between all things with mass or energy.



"If Gun Control worked, Chicago would look like Mayberry, not Thunderdome" - Cam Edwards
 
Posts: 16536 | Location: Under the Boot of Tyranny in Connectistan | Registered: February 02, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Baroque Bloke
Picture of Pipe Smoker
posted Hide Post
Then there’s this:
“fundamental force, also called fundamental interaction, in physics, any of the four basic forces—gravitational, electromagnetic, strong, and weak—that govern how objects or particles interact and how certain particles decay. All the known forces of nature can be traced to these fundamental forces. The fundamental forces are characterized on the basis of the following four criteria: the types of particles that experience the force, the relative strength of the force, the range over which the force is effective, and the nature of the particles that mediate the force. …”

https://www.britannica.com/sci...damental-interaction



Serious about crackers
 
Posts: 9003 | Location: San Diego | Registered: July 26, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
Picture of Skins2881
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rey HRH:
quote:
Originally posted by ftttu:
quote:
Originally posted by bobtheelf:
What really bends my brain is this:

We usually visualize the curvature of spacetime as a result of mass with a 2-dimensional plane with a mass curving it in to a third dimension.

This implies that in "reality", mass that curves 4-dimensional spacetime actually curves it in to a 5th dimension.


That 2 dimensional plane is just a visual representation.

Another thing taking a long time to apprehend was that empty space, which is just common sense, isn’t empty. It is something which I’ve referred to as space/time. All this is confirmed- one way is how GPS satellites are dealt with. Time is different closer to a massive object, so that is taken into account with the satellites.


While I agree that mass affects time such as the even horizon of a black hole where time stops, I believe the time rate difference in satellites and planes is caused more by speed rather than mass.

As an object's speed increases, time slows down and as the same object's speed increases, it's mass increases as well.


You've got that wrong. Satellites and planes time dilation is due to gravity. Time dilation due to speed is less noticeable until you get significant fractions of the speed of light. It's almost a flat line until you get to 50% then from 90 to 100% the chart turns near vertical.



Jesse

Sic Semper Tyrannis
 
Posts: 20844 | Location: Loudoun County, Virginia | Registered: December 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His Royal Hiney
Picture of Rey HRH
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Skins2881:
quote:
Originally posted by Rey HRH:


While I agree that mass affects time such as the even horizon of a black hole where time stops, I believe the time rate difference in satellites and planes is caused more by speed rather than mass.

As an object's speed increases, time slows down and as the same object's speed increases, it's mass increases as well.


You've got that wrong. Satellites and planes time dilation is due to gravity. Time dilation due to speed is less noticeable until you get significant fractions of the speed of light. It's almost a flat line until you get to 50% then from 90 to 100% the chart turns near vertical.


Okay, I stand corrected. I'm slow because I'm been mostly laying on my back rather than standing up. I don't mind learning something new. I did fact check you using ChatGPT. I use it for a lot of research. I know it does often come up with factually incorrect answers that are sometimes contradictory with an immediately preceding answer it gives.

quote:
What affects the time rate difference of planes and satellites more compared to time on the surface of the earth - is it the relative speed or the mass of the earth? Give references and citations.


quote:
Both the relative speed and the mass of the Earth have an impact on the time rate difference experienced by planes and satellites compared to time on the surface of the Earth. However, the dominant factor in this context is the gravitational potential, which is directly related to the mass of the Earth.

According to the theory of general relativity, clocks in regions with stronger gravitational fields run slower compared to clocks in regions with weaker gravitational fields. This effect is known as gravitational time dilation. The closer an object is to a massive body, such as the Earth, the stronger the gravitational field and the slower time passes.

The time dilation due to gravitational potential is more significant for planes and satellites compared to the time dilation due to relative speed (special relativity) because the speeds of planes and satellites are relatively low compared to the speed of light. The gravitational time dilation effect dominates in this scenario.

References:

Rindler, W. (2006). Relativity: Special, General, and Cosmological. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0198567325.

Hartle, J. B. (2003). Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity. Pearson Education. ISBN: 978-0805386622.

Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., & Wheeler, J. A. (2017). Gravitation. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691177793.

These references provide detailed explanations of the concepts of special relativity and general relativity, including the effects of relative speed and gravitational potential on time dilation. They support the understanding that the dominant factor affecting the time rate difference of planes and satellites compared to time on the surface of the Earth is the gravitational potential, which is determined by the mass of the Earth.



"It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life – daily and hourly. Our answer must consist not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual." Viktor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning, 1946.
 
Posts: 19713 | Location: The Free State of Arizona - Ditat Deus | Registered: March 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
No ethanol!
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by trapper189:
What would happen if the Sun just disappeared? Would the planets immediately just go flying off into space?


Not that simply disappearing is possible without other extreme forces, but yup. Newton's first law: An object at rest remains at rest, or if in motion, remains in motion at a constant velocity unless acted on by a net external force.


------------------
The plural of anecdote is not data. -Frank Kotsonis
 
Posts: 2019 | Location: Berks Co PA | Registered: December 20, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
Picture of Skins2881
posted Hide Post
You're using ChatGPT to explain the theory of relativity, meanwhile I'm currently having AI draw me pictures of ninja ducks swordfighting...



Jesse

Sic Semper Tyrannis
 
Posts: 20844 | Location: Loudoun County, Virginia | Registered: December 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His Royal Hiney
Picture of Rey HRH
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Skins2881:
You're using ChatGPT to explain the theory of relativity, meanwhile I'm currently having AI draw me pictures of ninja ducks swordfighting...


Not theory of relativity but, yes, I mentioned that because I know you use the painting and I've been using it a lot. It's better than Google or any search engine.



"It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life – daily and hourly. Our answer must consist not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual." Viktor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning, 1946.
 
Posts: 19713 | Location: The Free State of Arizona - Ditat Deus | Registered: March 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
quote:
Originally posted by wrightd:
quote:
Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
Why is gravity so cheap?

Because it's mass-produced.

Now Waterbury,

I was going to try to make more progress by commenting further on the genuinely intelligent contributions from screamingcokatoo, kkina, ftttu, jey, and rey, and right before I wasn't sure if I could pull it off, you dropped this, knocking me back to square one, knowing not how to proceed.

Maybe after a break I'll be able to think clearly again to see if I may contribute one last time before the IQ in the room increases any further.

While what I posted was in fact a joke, it goes right to the simplest explanation of gravity - the fundamental interaction which causes attraction between all things with mass or energy.

Yes absolutely, it was a pretty good joke, esp after it dawned on me it was true. This is why my grown daughters still to this day tell me how bad my dad jokes were when they were little, and in this case here still are, but they aren't scientific nerds like me.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Skins2881:
quote:
Originally posted by Rey HRH:
quote:
Originally posted by ftttu:
quote:
Originally posted by bobtheelf:
What really bends my brain is this:

We usually visualize the curvature of spacetime as a result of mass with a 2-dimensional plane with a mass curving it in to a third dimension.

This implies that in "reality", mass that curves 4-dimensional spacetime actually curves it in to a 5th dimension.


That 2 dimensional plane is just a visual representation.

Another thing taking a long time to apprehend was that empty space, which is just common sense, isn’t empty. It is something which I’ve referred to as space/time. All this is confirmed- one way is how GPS satellites are dealt with. Time is different closer to a massive object, so that is taken into account with the satellites.


While I agree that mass affects time such as the even horizon of a black hole where time stops, I believe the time rate difference in satellites and planes is caused more by speed rather than mass.

As an object's speed increases, time slows down and as the same object's speed increases, it's mass increases as well.


You've got that wrong. Satellites and planes time dilation is due to gravity. Time dilation due to speed is less noticeable until you get significant fractions of the speed of light. It's almost a flat line until you get to 50% then from 90 to 100% the chart turns near vertical.

Yes that's right. I remember after watching a video of Brian Greene showing an interactive computer algorithm graphic on stage this affect how time dialates with speed, how that curve didn't really take off until well after .5c. So for fun I put the forumla he gave on a spreadsheet just to see it for myself. One thing I couldn't figure out however, is that as a mass approaches light speed, but apparently cannot ever achive it, that dialation just continues to approach asymptiotically, so I don't know if this means that time actaully stops, or does the equation just break down at the extreme case. It is interesting that Richard Feynmen said the best equations in physics are still just an approximation. Really precise and incredibly reliable, but not perfect. Hence why Einsteins equations break down inside black holes etc. You can listen to many Univerisity Feynman lectures on the internet, as well of his funny stories when he was working on the Manhattan Project and the like.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rey HRH:
quote:
Originally posted by Skins2881:
quote:
Originally posted by Rey HRH:


While I agree that mass affects time such as the even horizon of a black hole where time stops, I believe the time rate difference in satellites and planes is caused more by speed rather than mass.

As an object's speed increases, time slows down and as the same object's speed increases, it's mass increases as well.


You've got that wrong. Satellites and planes time dilation is due to gravity. Time dilation due to speed is less noticeable until you get significant fractions of the speed of light. It's almost a flat line until you get to 50% then from 90 to 100% the chart turns near vertical.


Okay, I stand corrected. I'm slow because I'm been mostly laying on my back rather than standing up. I don't mind learning something new. I did fact check you using ChatGPT. I use it for a lot of research. I know it does often come up with factually incorrect answers that are sometimes contradictory with an immediately preceding answer it gives.

quote:
What affects the time rate difference of planes and satellites more compared to time on the surface of the earth - is it the relative speed or the mass of the earth? Give references and citations.


quote:
Both the relative speed and the mass of the Earth have an impact on the time rate difference experienced by planes and satellites compared to time on the surface of the Earth. However, the dominant factor in this context is the gravitational potential, which is directly related to the mass of the Earth.

According to the theory of general relativity, clocks in regions with stronger gravitational fields run slower compared to clocks in regions with weaker gravitational fields. This effect is known as gravitational time dilation. The closer an object is to a massive body, such as the Earth, the stronger the gravitational field and the slower time passes.

The time dilation due to gravitational potential is more significant for planes and satellites compared to the time dilation due to relative speed (special relativity) because the speeds of planes and satellites are relatively low compared to the speed of light. The gravitational time dilation effect dominates in this scenario.

References:

Rindler, W. (2006). Relativity: Special, General, and Cosmological. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0198567325.

Hartle, J. B. (2003). Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity. Pearson Education. ISBN: 978-0805386622.

Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., & Wheeler, J. A. (2017). Gravitation. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-0691177793.

These references provide detailed explanations of the concepts of special relativity and general relativity, including the effects of relative speed and gravitational potential on time dilation. They support the understanding that the dominant factor affecting the time rate difference of planes and satellites compared to time on the surface of the Earth is the gravitational potential, which is determined by the mass of the Earth.

There is a cool youtube video of a professor taking his students to a high elevation with one atomic clock after syncing a second clock at their starting point. When they returned the clock they took with them after driving to the top of a mountain had a different time. That was amazing. Another video is one I think they did in the 70s, syncing two clocks, then flying one of them around the world on a passenger jet, then showing the difference when they returned. Again pretty powerful demonstration of the physics. In both cases, however, no matter how dramtic the difference, you would never be able to notice it yourself, since in both cases this affect is only noticeable from a relatavistic point of view between two different inertial frames of reference (I hope I got that right). Within your own intertial frame of reference (whether going slow or fast etc) everthying is normal to you no matter your speed or gravitational well. It's at the extremes however that I don't understand - the gravity of a black hole, or the speed of light - and that I THINK is where Einsteins equations on this stuff break down. So maybe that's the answer - which is we still don't really know.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by fritz:
As humans, we think we have a pretty good handle on laws of physics, gravity, space-time, astrophysics, and the like. Then we get some reality checks.

We can't seem to reconcile General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. In lay terms, the theory of the very big with the theory of the very small.

Even if we have concepts of regular matter down, we don't know much about the other "stuff". Many scientists believe that regular matter makes up only 5% of the universe, with 27% being dark matter, and 68% being dark energy. So far, nobody really knows what the 95% "other stuff" is.

Scientists generally believe the universe is 13.7 to 13.8 billion years old. But the width (if that's what we want to call it) of the universe is said to be 93 to 94 billion light years -- almost 7 times larger than the distance light can travel during this time. This implies that space itself has expanded at speeds multiple times the speed of light.

In some ways it's akin the parable of blind men describing an elephant after touching only a small portions of an elephant.

Yes absolutely that's super freaky right there. It's cool they figured it out, that the Universe has been expanding, even though they still don't know why. That other thing they've figured is that there is no such thing as "empty" as far as can be determined, even in the empty of empties between galaxy clusters, there's still something going on, really weired, like something or another popping into, and out of, existence. Incredible.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wrightd
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by CQB60:
Perhaps the most accurate approach would be to call gravity an "emergent force," meaning that what looks like a direct force is actually emerging from more fundamental effects (the warping of spacetime). With this in mind, it is perfectly reasonable to call gravity a real force.

Yes for all practical purposes absolutely. I'm assuming these standard classical physics equations were used to calculate the trajectories when we sent our men to the moon in 1969. BTW I watched that Saturn V liftoff and Moon Walk both live on our B&W TV at home when I was a little kid. Can you imagine how exciting that was for a kid who read all of the How and Whey Science books for kids that were ever printed.




Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster
 
Posts: 8702 | Location: Nowhere the constitution is not honored | Registered: February 01, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Gravity by nature is not a force itself, though it can be calculated as such.

© SIGforum 2024