0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Gravity, among all the forces and laws of nature, stands out as one that most affects daily living.
Consider any two particles in this universe. They would be forced towards each other due only to the shielding effect that each one has for the other. The net force on each would be inversely proportional to the square of their separation, and proportional to the product of their masses.It is not supposed that all the gravitational forces flowing omni-directionally through the boundaries of matter will interact with all the particles within. Indeed, most will pass through, others, perhaps being either deflected, reflected or absorbed and will not continue further along their original lines. If a single object is considered, it should remain in equilibrium as a result. But place another object nearby, and then the flow of gravitational force from the direction of the original object will be reduced somewhat, and vice versa.
The origin of gravitational force in other masses has the consequence that the force is repulsive at large, cosmological distances, but attractive at short distances. And this easily explains the expansion of the universe. The attraction at short distances (on the cosmological scale) is due to "shadowing". That is, a planet throws a shadow on nearby objects, which means that the force from that side is reduced. Clearly the effect of this force will be proportional to the size of the shadow, which follows an inverse square law.
What is interesting, and what keeps nagging at me now, is whether this (the basis of interaction between particles) isn't the best method of justifying relativity and quantum physics in terms of gravity. That the interactions between particles alters the probability wave of each other.
Quote from: angstWhat is interesting, and what keeps nagging at me now, is whether this (the basis of interaction between particles) isn't the best method of justifying relativity and quantum physics in terms of gravity. That the interactions between particles alters the probability wave of each other.Quantum Physics doesn't really have a workable theory of gravity. We always revert to General Relativity to answer gravitational questions. Maybe that's why we find so many new and diverse attempts to understand gravity among science buffs.
On the use of energy as a function of mass in the production of gravity, would it not perhaps happen that as a mass unit attracts something, and uses its mass equivalent energy, would its mass not somehow be affected? Also that of the item being attracted. There certainly would be kinetic or thermal energy in evidence at the end of the day.On space-time, I have not the ability to imagine the mechanism for it. All the simplified illustrations I have seen so far show a sagging net holding a large ball. But no explanation of why the net sags.Best wishes to allRobert MurraySouth Africa
Ben, I could not find your theory. I'd be interested to see it.
On the use of energy as a function of mass in the production of gravity, would it not perhaps happen that as a mass unit attracts something, and uses its mass equivalent energy, would its mass not somehow be affected? Also that of the item being attracted. There certainly would be kinetic or thermal energy in evidence at the end of the day.
Is this more "larf"?