Originally posted by CLPrime
1) gravity is, in fact, not a warping of spacetime, and is a force that operates in the same way as the other fundamental forces, making it possible
for (the non-fundamental) centripetal force to effect it through a direct causal interaction with the gravitational quanta (gravitons).
I like #1 ... My understanding of Gravity (like most of this stuff) is extremely basic ... but sufficient for me to get a mental picture of
attraction based on the mass of an object, and the matter its comprised of ... Like a big magnet pulling on a smaller magnet for my simple mind ..
I do like the idea that gravity is the warping of spacetime ... in that .. it kinda simplifies gravity for me to get a good mental picture of how it
'might' operate .. ie ... earth, orbitting the sun, as it is travelling in the curvature of the suns warping of space .. but doesnt fall in, as the
speed and trajectory we are travelling at, stops us falling any further into the warped space and into the sun .... or something to that effect
I'm on the fence with that too ... The warping of time, from the sun, is extremely small in my understanding ... (far more appreciable when you get to
black holes) ... For the warping of spacetime to be gravity . space would have to be warped by the sun .. to the furthest orbitting object in the
solar system, and likely beyond ... yet we see such little effect on time by comparison .. i realise there could be a very good, and simple reason for
this .. if i could wrap my head around spacetime a bit better ...
Im certainly not in a position to say that's not the case ... But hard for me to wrap my head around ... the mental picture of objects 'pulling' at
each other .. 'attracting' each other almost like magnets works better for me ..
Ahh the good ol' graviton ...
I think String theory has a long way to go, and when taken seriously and pursued by more scientists, will evolve to something even whackier sounding
.. but will explain, and hopefully bridge the gaps between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics ... or even replace them as one unified theory ..
and graviton is a great candidate for gravity .. but regardless, i would not be at all surprised if the idea that the warping of spacetime is
responsible for our earth being in orbit around the sun, is on shaky ground in 10 years from now ...
I think i will also keep a close eye, on what science learns from Quasars ... With regards to what i was saying, about a supermassive black hole being
able to focus its own gravity ...
One thing sprung to mind while i was in the shower a few days ago .. (a false Eureka moment
A Quasar, in my understanding, is essentially, a supermassive black hole .. which has swallowed enough matter (gas) from its galaxy, that its
swallowing more than it can take, and emits the matter, in jets, from the poles, which can extend for hundreds of thousands of light years or so ...
I wondered, how, when light can not even escape , can this jet of matter be thrown out so far .. unless, of course, what i said is correct .. and
gravity is not equal all around it, and the force that the black hole wants to eject this matter at, is greater than the force of the gravitational
field and centripetal force at the poles ... matter is spewn from the weakest point in gravitational field ... which is also the weakest point in
centripetal force i imagine .. at the dead centre .. north and south poles ..
Apparently ... When a regular black hole reaches this point, where it is eating more than it can consume, it supposedly, coughs the matter, or
accretion disc, away .. and then continues again when the matter is drawn back ...
Why doesnt a supermassive black hole do the same thing ... perhaps it does, and we havent seen it yet .. but for now .. it seems the jets emitted by a
supermassive black hole, are the result of it 'apparently' eating more than it can chew ..
I have no idea why supermassive black holes appear to behave differently in this way .. but the fact they appear to, is what brought me back to my
earlier point, that, we barely understand regular black holes, and have known about supermassive black holes at the centre of galaxies, for 5 minutes
by comparison .. never mind the part they play in galaxy formation ...
I decided to check up on this when i got out the shower ... i checked wikipedia ..
It seems science initially came to the same conclusion as me ... but decided, since their current understanding doesnt allow for light or matter to
'escape' ... (or be 'ejected' at a force greater than gravity at poles as oppose to 'escape' .. spinkters theory) ... that, indeed the supermassive
black hole cannot be responsible for the jets .. so instead .. it is the accretion disc itself, that is spewing the jets of matter into space ..
Matter being thrown out from the accretion disc, at a 90 degree angle to the plane of the accretion disc, also goes against my idea that, the
gravitational force at the equator, would be greater than at the poles ...
When i read that .. although it didnt convince me as fact, the jets of matter come from the accretion disc, i decided not to post my Eureka moment
But .. since you mention , option number 1 ... and Gravitons ... then i thought id share my latest ramblings with you
Infact .. come to think of it ... even if the matter is being ejected from the accretion disc (directly next to the supermassive black hole) . i still
fail to see how the particles can achieve a speed, as to escape the supermassive black holes apparently evenly distributed huge gravitational field
Also .. I fail to see how the accretion disc, which is matter caught in the centripetal force (?), could send jets of matter outwards that the
supermassive black hole could not consume, perpendicular to the plane of the accretion disc ? .. what force in the accretion disc (or interaction
from the black hole) could do that ?
Why not just cough matter back out from the accretion disc, like a regular black hole apparently does ..
I can admit i am clutching at straws ... I hope the people who embrace the idea that its the accretion disc which is spewing out the matter in a
Quasar can admit the same thing too ..
I am absolutely not convinced by this theory yet .. and if it in indeed very flawed .. then there is plenty of scope for spinkters theory to be even
partially correct ...
As excellent as quantum mechanics and string theory are in their own area ... it would be excellent for a unifying theory to explain it all ..
String theory has been refined several times ... and although each time it evolves, it just seems to get wackier .. i think it is the best way forward
we have just now ... but not the answer in itself ...
It does throw out some thought provoking ideas ...
Including, why, gravity may be so weak compared to the other forces ... it kinda explains, how ... the graviton, for example, could be jumping between
parallel universe, or dimensions ...
I remember one theory, that, the 4 forces were equal, but due to the nature of gravity, flowing between dimensions (i think string theory allows for
11 or 13 dimensions), that all the gravity is spread around in other dimensions as well as ours (or even parallel universes, which could perhaps be
considered to exist in other dimensions), ... and electromagnetism, and strong and weak nuclear force do not ... which is why gravity is by far the
Thanks for your ideas CLPrime ... I like the way you think
edit on 7/5/11 by WhatAreSpinkters because: (no reason given)