Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:

# Application of Gravitation

page: 1
2

posted on Apr, 4 2013 @ 02:54 PM
The majority of you know of gravity and the four main forces in general. These forces are the binding forces of all matter that we know of. These forces, as you all know, include electromagnetism (light), gravity, as well as the strong and weak nuclear forces.

Here is where I have met somewhat of conundrum.

First, electromagnetic particles, photons, have no mass (or at least that we know of), yet they are attracted by gravity. A very strange quandary in the realm of physics, but this is not the main point of this OP.

The point is to highlight a common theme that involves gravity.

As many of you know, there are common themes, visually, on various scales of the Universe, from smallest to largest. We see atoms with orbitals, a central nucleus (sun) just like solar systems, just like spiral galaxies. We see the mapping of the brain and the neurons, similar to the mapping of luminous matter and the subsequent structure throughout the visible Universe.

With this in mind, I got thinking about gravity…

First of all, here is a brief description and the equation for gravity:

Gravitation, or gravity, is the natural phenomenon by which physical bodies appear to attract each other with a force proportional to their masses.

Or for you math folks:

Fg = G[(m1xm2)/(r^2)]

So if this is the case, all masses attract one another by this quantified amount.

I must ask, if the subatomic particles of an atom (the electron, proton, and neutron) have mass, then clearly gravity is what creates the orbital system, the attraction amongst them, no? Is it not gravity, just on such a small scale that we for whatever reason deem it is as something else (strong and weak nuclear forces) simply because the effects of gravity, on such small mass systems, may be different than the larger?

Take another example, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, large systems, such as the Milky Way and galactic clusters.

The total amount of gravity and concentration is so great in these larger systems, we find unknown forces known as dark matter, and dark energy. One of the issues is that objects further out in the discs of these galactic planes don't orbit at slower rates as predicted (although, dealing with so much mass THROUGHOUT the entire disc, I imagine the stars throughout getting pulled along by one another like a train). This "dark energy" seems similar to the nuclear strong and weak forces, just on a much larger scale, so could these simply be derivatives of gravity?

We have to consider that just like the AU measurement and all things “Geocentric,” we have a very Earth-centered view point of things. Naturally, this lends itself to our most concrete understanding of gravity, that being the Earth-Moon, or Earth-Sun systems, so seeing the effects of gravity on much smaller and much larger systems can seem very different, but perhaps they are not as diversified as we think.

Now, going back to the original description and equation, gravity is only related to mass and distance, but if electromagnetic particles (photons) interact with mass, there must be something more.

Enter Einstein’s relativity:

The phenomenon of gravitation itself, however, is a byproduct of a more fundamental phenomenon described by general relativity, which suggests that space-time is curved according to the energy and momentum of whatever matter and radiation are present.

If this is indeed the case, then it would seem that gravity, on all of these scales (Atomic to galactic), have less to do with mass, per se, and more to do with a volumetric/density kind of relationship, as these objects of space-time dent the multidimensional plane(s), visualized as if it is two-dimensional, or at least it would seem.

All of this considered, I believe we live in extremely exciting times, what with the FermiLab and CERN research into the “G” particle, as well as the hunt for gravitational radiation.

Also:

In December 2012, a research team in China announced that it had produced findings which seem to prove that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light. The team's findings were due to be released in a journal in 2013.

If this is true, the implications regarding the relationship with electromagnetism and its importance, immense.

Maybe we really will uncover the fundamentals of these baseline forces that conduct the orchestra of the Universal symphony.

posted on Apr, 4 2013 @ 03:26 PM
Gravity is both a "force" and an "effect"?

There is absolutley no proof of Dark matter or Dark energy by the way.
"Dark" is a typical pop science answer to a complex issue that breaks more established conventions than it solves.

No wonder Gravity doesnt seem to know what to do with itself.

I wonder if Gravity would make more sense if it were described as the gradient between quantum density of mass at any given locality.

posted on Apr, 4 2013 @ 05:52 PM
My understanding of gravity is this,

at the center of every nucleus is something similar to a singularity. This singularity has a localised effect on the vacuum energy which pervades all space. Essentially the singularity coheres the localised vacuum energy and we experience this effect as what we call gravity. It could be argued that in fact gravity is not pulling a mass towards a larger mass but rather the smaller mass is being pushed towards the larger mass.

In addition to this localised coherence of the vacuum energy the atom is pulsating sending out waves, these waves are what gives us the illusion of the solidness of a material.

posted on Apr, 4 2013 @ 07:58 PM

Originally posted by LUXUS
My understanding of gravity is this,

at the center of every nucleus is something similar to a singularity. This singularity has a localised effect on the vacuum energy which pervades all space. Essentially the singularity coheres the localised vacuum energy and we experience this effect as what we call gravity. It could be argued that in fact gravity is not pulling a mass towards a larger mass but rather the smaller mass is being pushed towards the larger mass.

In addition to this localised coherence of the vacuum energy the atom is pulsating sending out waves, these waves are what gives us the illusion of the solidness of a material.

Thank you for thoughtful and indeed thought provoking replies.

You got me thinking with that bit on objects being pushed into objects of greater mass, not pulled.

It got me thinking about the concentration/density and structure of photon dispersal in a vacuum (Space) as well the concentration/density and structure of photon dispersal in various other mediums such as solids, liquids, gas, and plasma of various elements.

Would be interesting to know.

As for it's application to the OP and what I was talking about, perhaps photons and electromagnetism aid in pushing anything that takes up space/time towards other things that take up space time, with a degree vector equivalent to the concentration of these photons.

I sometimes wondered if photons were literally singularities as the above poster said, acting as if they were possibly "White holes" create an opposite effect to that of a black hole, thus pushing objects towards one another, and especially towards higher concentrations (mass based particles such as atoms and the concentrations of these atoms thus deepening this "vaccum" or well.
edit on 4-4-2013 by 1Providence1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 07:19 AM

If you are familiar with the Casimir effect you will know that cohering the vacuum results in a force that pushes the plates together, that force in reality is gravity. Only difference is that in the casimir setup you are using two plates to alter the vacuum density whilst in an atom it is the singularity in its nucleus which preforms the same function.

In both cases gravity is really a push not a pull as is widely taught.

en.wikipedia.org...

new topics

top topics

2