Gravity

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Plato, Feb 16, 2008.

  1. Plato

    Plato Guest

    OK I understand the below....


    Gravity is the other common force. Newton was the first person to study
    it seriously, and he came up with the law of universal gravitation:

    Each particle of matter attracts every other particle with a force which
    is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely
    proportional to the square of the distance between them.

    The standard formula for gravity is:

    Gravitational force = (G * m1 * m2) / (d2)

    where G is the gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the
    two objects for which you are calculating the force, and d is the
    distance between the centers of gravity of the two masses.

    .....OK, Einstein was the second brain to study it seriously........


    But my question is:

    Are both those dudes correct? Or is gravity just "space" pushing us
    inwards to fill the hole a hole in space???
    Plato, Feb 16, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Plato

    Mike Easter Guest

    Plato wrote:
    > OK I understand the below....
    >
    >
    > Gravity is the other common force. Newton was the first person to
    > study it seriously, and he came up with the law of universal
    > gravitation:


    Okay, so we're going to talk about theoretical physics and how the
    theories about gravity are evolving.

    The business about things having weight was being discussed by
    philosophers centuries before the common era (BC/AD or BCE/CE) and don't
    forget about Galileo at Pisa. The scientific revolution arrived with
    Newtonian physics and his 'laws' (theory) about gravity...

    > Gravitational force = (G * m1 * m2) / (d2)


    .... to explain all kinds of things including planetary behaviors, except
    that the math just didn't quite work out right. Those silly planets
    just weren't quite doing exactly the right thing.

    > ....OK, Einstein was the second brain to study it seriously........


    Yep, old Alfred got all involved with a much better theory which was
    that of general relativity. Objects can accelerate toward each other
    based on the curvature of spacetime caused by their matter which created
    a set of field equations named for him and some other dudes.

    Under the Einsteinian general relativity theory and equations, various
    cosmological behaviors including those of the planets are doing what
    those theories and equations say they should be doing much better than
    'simple' older Newtonian physical equations.

    > But my question is:
    >
    > Are both those dudes correct? Or is gravity just "space" pushing us
    > inwards to fill the hole a hole in space???


    Einsteinian gravity theories don't like to get into bed with quantum
    mechanics. So the gravity related theory/ies continue to evolve into
    quantum gravity, string theory, the theory of everything TOE, and
    recently all of the brouhaha about the so-called 'An Exceptionally
    Simple Theory of Everything'.

    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Feb 16, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Plato

    Guest

    Plato <|@|.|> wrote:

    >OK I understand the below....
    >
    >
    >Gravity is the other common force. Newton was the first person to study
    >it seriously, and he came up with the law of universal gravitation:
    >
    >Each particle of matter attracts every other particle with a force which
    >is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely
    >proportional to the square of the distance between them.
    >
    >The standard formula for gravity is:
    >
    >Gravitational force = (G * m1 * m2) / (d2)
    >
    >where G is the gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the
    >two objects for which you are calculating the force, and d is the
    >distance between the centers of gravity of the two masses.
    >
    >....OK, Einstein was the second brain to study it seriously........
    >
    >
    >But my question is:
    >
    >Are both those dudes correct? Or is gravity just "space" pushing us
    >inwards to fill the hole a hole in space???


    Newton and Einstein were correct in their observations, their math
    works and everybody happy, specially NASA.

    But at the quantum level it's believed that gravitons flow to and from
    particles; the more gravitons a particle attracts the more mass it
    will have. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton





    --

    Bette Davis Eyes
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=_-RdAzkKlXY
    , Feb 16, 2008
    #3
  4. Plato

    Guest

    , Feb 16, 2008
    #4
  5. Plato

    Dan Drake Guest

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:33:02 UTC, Plato <|@|.|> wrote:

    > OK I understand the below....
    >
    >
    > Gravity is the other common force. Newton was the first person to study
    > it seriously,


    Well, actually, you could say the first was Galileo, who got the right law
    for how things fall, after thousands of years of everybody being wrong.
    (And before him some clever Medieval guys did things with the mathematics
    of changing speeds, but they never really studied gravity.) But that was
    just falling bodies here on Earth, and he never made a universal law of
    it.

    > and he came up with the law of universal gravitation:
    >
    > Each particle of matter attracts every other particle with a force which
    > is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely
    > proportional to the square of the distance between them.
    >
    > The standard formula for gravity is:
    >
    > Gravitational force = (G * m1 * m2) / (d2)
    >
    > where G is the gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the
    > two objects for which you are calculating the force, and d is the
    > distance between the centers of gravity of the two masses.
    >
    > ....OK, Einstein was the second brain to study it seriously........
    >
    >
    > But my question is:
    >
    > Are both those dudes correct? Or is gravity just "space" pushing us
    > inwards to fill the hole a hole in space???


    On the physical law, Newton was quite correct so long as you didn't have
    to deal with very high speeds or very strong fields, which were impossible
    to observe in his day. Einstein's version covered a lot wider range of
    conditions. Under "normal" conditions, Einstein's version simplifies to be
    the same as Newton's. If it hadn't, he'd have dismissed as crank; in fact,
    he *would* have been a crank.

    But in the way one *talks* about it, which is more or less a matter of
    philosophy, the universal attractive force turns out not to work
    universally; or you could say it doesn't even make sense universally.
    Einstein's bent space-time does work, so far, provided you don't have to
    make it work closely with quantum mechanics.

    But but, "pushing us inwards" isn't really what it's about. It's about
    taking the shortest course in space-time between two points in space-time.
    An orbit really *looks* curved when you look at it, not like a shortest
    path at all, but that's just because you're looking at it in 3 dimensions
    and then looking at your watch, which is not the right way to compute the
    path in the 4 dimensions. I hope this is perfectly clear to you, in which
    case there will be *one* person to whom it is clear.




    --
    Dan Drake

    http://www.dandrake.com/
    porlockjr.blogspot.com
    Dan Drake, Feb 18, 2008
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chris Newey

    Micro Planet Gravity

    Chris Newey, Jan 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    498
    Paul Blarmy
    Jan 8, 2004
  2. Chris Newey

    Gravity News Reader config problem - SOLVED

    Chris Newey, Jan 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    424
    Chris Newey
    Jan 9, 2004
  3. I. P. Freely

    Microplanet Gravity won't stay online

    I. P. Freely, Jan 31, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    479
    I. P. Freely
    Jan 31, 2005
  4. Frogman

    Gravity & WinXP Pro

    Frogman, Mar 3, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    432
    Frogman
    Mar 3, 2005
  5. philo

    Gravity (theory)

    philo, Aug 14, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    82
    Views:
    1,948
    Old Gringo
    Aug 15, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page