To be different than my normal posts, and prove there's more to me than a horny god-freak, this'll be a physics one!
Gravity has been hard to link in with other theories, I think because it involves mass, and mass is known to slow down relative time so I think you have at least 2 factors making things complicated and contributing to the same overall force.

In a black hole, you have at the singularity an infinite density of mass (not infinite amount, but density), there, time stops completely, because that's the only reason something like light cannot escape - light has no mass, so in theory it shouldn't be affected by gravity in the classical sense, so in theory if time didn't stop at the singularity light would either pass through or reflect from, or emit from a black hole as if it was a planet.

And there has been a theory that gravity is just the effect of how time is distorted in the direction towards the mass, which (by ways I don't understand because I can't imagine 4d spacetime) causes us to be attracted to the mass.

But I don't think gravity can only be one effect, I don't think the effect of distorting spacetime is strong enough by itself to explain how planets of low mass, like ours, manage to hold onto as much as they do - the distortion of time by relativity is a weak effect, so I think there's also a field affect (similar to magnetism) - that happens between mass, in addition to the established attraction we have to mass because of distorted time.

If mass can be represented as being like a sort of spin (as other things can be) - perhaps it can couple to other spins? That would make it like magnetism, which is the overall attraction you get because large scale coupling of the spin of many atomic nuclei in magnetism causes a large energy difference, which is what causes the attraction/repulsion. Coupling is known to vary with distance, like gravity, and better yet, it's not totally smooth classical physics (like field effects used to be thought to be) - it depends on the number of things you have spinning and how they couple - very on+off - perhaps gravity is the same? - not a smooth classical attraction but one that depends on the number of units of mass you have that can couple. (mass is quantized)
 
   

 


 
 
DIVOMAN on
Re: Gravity


Can it be that the cycles of the spin in matter are so close tight together that are imperceptible and in the case of light so far apart that also cannot be detected?

Just a thought of an ignorant that loves the subject.

bahamat on
Re: Gravity:
I don't fully understand but it's giving me ideas to do with particle vs wave properties, so it might have something to do with that - I know things very particle-like have easy to measure mass, and, similar to what you said, it's wavelength is incredibly small so as to probably be unmeasurable, but calculatable.

And yeah, by contrast light, which is generally very wave-like has measurable wavelength but (we assume) no mass (or an undetectable amount) - but it is entirely possible though that it might have some mass, since photons do have some degree or particle property - so maybe that explains why light can't escape black holes - that it really is pulled in by gravity for having mass (and so can't escape a singularity).
It also helps in explaining how matter and energy might interconvert - that really they are cut of the same cloth so it's not such a great leap to redistribute things because matter and light would all share the same properties, just to different degrees (mass, wavelength, spin, etc)

Thankyou for giving me something to think about!
HappyBuddaH on
Re: Gravity
I'm sure some material in things like planets and stars have magnetic properties so you may not be far off in saying that somehow these magnetic rocks/metals/etc. interact across space with other objects also containing magnetic 'stuff'. String theory also proposes to tie gravity in with magnetism and quantum mechanics. 
bahamat on
Re: Gravity:

To include non-magnetic elements, which have gravity, it could be something similar to magnetism (spin coupling), only that it's based on mass itself rather than nuclear spin.
I am sure, as you say, that magnetism must add an extra attractive/repulsive effect, that should also be taken into account so well done!
I don't know anything about string theory yet, I hope to
HappyBuddaH on
Re: Gravity:
this is where i learned about it

good stuff

 
Login to replyToggle picture size
 

Latest Comment
Re: Current health dilemma(s) - my not-so-newly-fo... weight is maintained my us not having alot of money. i...

Read...


 
© 2005-2007 MindSay Interactive LLC
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
My Account
Inbox
Account Settings
Lost Password?
Logout
Blog
Update Blog
Edit Old Entries
Pick a Theme
Customize Design
Modify Plugins
Community
Your Profile
Wiki Pages
MindSay Tags
Video & Photos
Geographic Directory
Inside MindSay
About MindSay
MindSay and RSS
Report Spam
Contact Us
Help