Electro-Magnetic-Space/Time Continuum?

[Ghosth]

I have to agree with Simaril, the first step is realizing you don't know why, and asking the question.


Part of the problem is that we have no "tools" for experimenting with gravity.
All we have is the bottom of this gravity well, and a few very short duration hops up out of it. (space shuttle, etc)


Another thing to keep in mind, is that these forces are not monolithic, they do not stand alone.
There is a complex relationship between magnetic forces, electric forces and gravity.

Example, you can use electricity to create a magnetic field. You can use a magnetic field to create electricity.
What we don't know is how to use either to create gravity.

Just as electricity in the wild (lighting for an example) is different that electricity tamed and controlled.
So will gravity tamed and controlled be different than Gravity in the wild.

The problem being that we do not yet have the tools to create and control it.
So how do we make the tools to make the tools to make the tools, when we don't know what tools we need?

[bozon]

Example, you can use electricity to create a magnetic field. You can use a magnetic field to create electricity.
What we don't know is how to use either to create gravity.

Well, we do know how to create gravity. The only thing that makes gravity is energy. It can be in the form of mass (E=mc^2) which is a large amount of energy in a small volume and it can be the energy stored in an electro-magnetic field, does not really matter. Light (which is an electro-magnetic phenomenon) has no mass, but has gravity. However, we are no where near the capability of concentrating the energy of an electro-magnetic field to that of solid matter on the macro level (i.e. more than the mass-energy of a single elementary particle).

[trax1]

Didn't read this whole thread so not sure if this was mentioned yet, but another unusual thing about magnetic feilds & gravitational fields is their 2 of the 4 fundamental interactions of nature, yet magnetism is much stronger then gravity, you can see this by taking a small magnet and picking an object up, thus defeating gravity, but no one knows why magnetism is so much stronger then gravity, they should be the same strength, the only theory I've heard to explain it is that gravity is being deluded by extra dimensions, so we only feel part of it.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

In one section, he goes over the whole story about how Einstein was perplexed by the question of exactly HOW two objects, with no direct connection to, or contact with each could transmit a gravitational force between each other.   These objects might be in a complete vacuum with no matter between them at all. 

Later research in quantum physics has shown that a vacuum is anything but empty of matter as it's perceived by us. The objects do have a connection.

[EskimoJoe]

I find this conversation quite intriguing. There are some things that I can barely comprehend,
but I'm really liking this. I have nothing to add to your scientific/philosophical thoughts that
would make any sense or have any data to back up such things. Maybe I'll write them down
and start a thread some other time.

Please, do continue 

[Ghosth]

"The only thing that makes gravity is energy."
Correction, the only thing that we "know" makes gravity is energy.

"Light (which is an electro-magnetic phenomenon) has no mass, but has gravity."
Does light have gravity? Light can be effected by gravity, example black holes are black because it sucks in all the light. Lets nothing escape the event horizon.

But if light had gravity itself you'd be able to counteract or "turn off" gravity with a strong light source.
Or double it, increase it by reversing the direction of the light. Thus a mirror on and strong sunlight should cause a local gravity distortion. I don't believe it does.


We really did not understand Electronics and Magnetism until we had the capability to create, and store electricity.  Once we were able to do that in a fairly short period of time we had electromagnets, those gave us electric motors etc. People figured out crude meters, leading to better tools, etc.

How do we build a device to create, store gravity? And with so much gravity all around us, how do we test things? How do we build the test equipment capable of measuring minor gravity fluctuations? How do we put gravity in a bottle, or battery to be released when we choose?


When I was still in school back in the 60's we took a field trip to see the big mainframe computer recently installed in the local college. Ran off punch cards I believe. Everyone got the chance to play tic tac toe with it.
(most lost, I fought it to a draw twice, then won the 3rd, tech's were going, "i thought it wasn't supposed to lose?)

Now I'm sitting at a PC that has so much more computing power available to be used per second that its not even funny. Where will that lead us?

Well, we do know how to create gravity. The only thing that makes gravity is energy. It can be in the form of mass (E=mc^2) which is a large amount of energy in a small volume and it can be the energy stored in an electro-magnetic field, does not really matter. Light (which is an electro-magnetic phenomenon) has no mass, but has gravity. However, we are no where near the capability of concentrating the energy of an electro-magnetic field to that of solid matter on the macro level (i.e. more than the mass-energy of a single elementary particle).

[AKKuya]

The answers to these questions are waiting in the quantum field of extremely tiny things hidden inside protons and neutrons and electrons.  Basically, the quarks, muons, strings and others infintely small critters that control the big universe in ways we have yet to discover.

These discoveries will only happen when technology is created to discover them and when someone is looking at them at the right time.

[trax1]

The answers to these questions are waiting in the quantum field of extremely tiny things hidden inside protons and neutrons and electrons.  Basically, the quarks, muons, strings and others infintely small critters that control the big universe in ways we have yet to discover.

These discoveries will only happen when technology is created to discover them and when someone is looking at them at the right time.

Well hopefully some of these things will be discovered by the LHC(Large Hadron Collider).

[Ghosth]

I'm not sure that collider's are going to teach us much other than what pieces matter can be broken into.

[dedalos]

OK.  I’m probably going to make myself look like an idiot here but it’s something that’s been bothering me, literally for years.  There seems to be some pretty sharp knives in the drawer here so maybe you can help.

I’m currently listening to :

“The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos”  (Brian Greene)
On my Audible books.  Its pretty interesting.  I recommend it.

In one section, he goes over the whole story about how Einstein was perplexed by the question of exactly HOW two objects, with no direct connection to, or contact with each could transmit a gravitational force between each other.   These objects might be in a complete vacuum with no matter between them at all.  What is the EXACT mechanism by which the force is mechanically transmitted???

The standard answer was “well,uhh, it’s the gravitational field”. But what does that MEAN?  You might as well be saying “magical spirits.”  What is the EXACT mechanism by which the influence is transmitted.  “Where are the invisible ropes” by which one object pulls on another, he asked.   Even Newton recognized it was an unanswered question at the time he was formulating the laws describing the results.  That led Einstein to develop the theory of curved space/time. It wasn’t so much that a magical force was being applied to an object, as the object moving thru curved space/time just looked like a force was being applied.   Great story.  All makes sense.  Bowling ball sagging a trampoline, roll on an cueball…follows the curve..yadda yadda.  Got it. 

Then the very next chapter he go into this whole section on magnetism and how objects are influenced by “magnetic fields”.   And that touched off a thing that’s been bothering me a long time.   Why is “magnetic field” any more a satisfactory answer than “gravitational field”???  What is the exact mechanism by which magnetic force is transmitted between objects that might be separated by complete vacuum???  Where are the invisible ropes? It BEGS the question, but he never even notes the parallel or I missed it.  Why doesn’t it beg the same question?

I’ve asked a lot of people, a lot smarter than me: “Yeah, but HOW does it transmit the force?  By what mechanism?“  The standard answer was “well uh, it’s the magnetic field”.   But what does that MEAN?  You might as well be saying “magical spirits.”  What is the EXACT mechanism by which the influence is mechanically transmitted.   That usually leads to “Well, it’s those lines of force.”

 

Sigh.  I’m either too dumb to ask the questions clearly or too dumb to understand the answer.

Is there an electro-magnetic-space/time plane of existence that is intersecting  the mass-space/time  plane that can be curved by magnetic potential instead of mass?  Would some kind of space curvature explain this invisible magnetic force the way it does gravitational force?

In a lot of ways magnetic fields are a lot freakier that gravitational fields.  Gravitational fields are continuous.  Magnetic fields are discontinuous, broken into the shells, or lines if you bisect them with a plane.  I can create magnetic fields at will with electricity.  Can you do that with gravity?  When I generate a magnetic field, am I warping electro-magnetic-space/time?

Yeah, I’ve always been fascinated my magnets and magnetism since I was a kid.
If you can explain it too me I’d be grateful.  But talk REAL slow and use small words. 

Regards,
Wab

Just so understand where you are coming from.  Newton and Einstein could not explain it and you think the guys in O'Club will?   

[CptTrips]

Just so understand where you are coming from.  Newton and Einstein could not explain it and you think the guys in O'Club will?   

Are you familiar with the term "Idiot Savant"?

,
Wab

[dedalos]

When I was still in school back in the 60's we took a field trip to see the big mainframe computer recently installed in the local college. Ran off punch cards I believe. Everyone got the chance to play tic tac toe with it.
(most lost, I fought it to a draw twice, then won the 3rd, tech's were going, "i thought it wasn't supposed to lose?)

  For real?  tic tac toe is a game where the guy going first cannot lose and the guy going second can always tie the game.  Are you sure you remember correctly?     Must have been an epic fight

[dedalos]

Are you familiar with the term "Idiot Savant"?

,
Wab

Nice.  However, I think only the first part of that applies in this forum 

[bozon]

"The only thing that makes gravity is energy."
Correction, the only thing that we "know" makes gravity is energy.

"Light (which is an electro-magnetic phenomenon) has no mass, but has gravity."
Does light have gravity? Light can be effected by gravity, example black holes are black because it sucks in all the light. Lets nothing escape the event horizon.

But if light had gravity itself you'd be able to counteract or "turn off" gravity with a strong light source.
Or double it, increase it by reversing the direction of the light. Thus a mirror on and strong sunlight should cause a local gravity distortion. I don't believe it does.

Light produce gravity just as normal mass does. However, nowhere that I know of in the current universe the energy density in the form of electro-magnetic energy is high enough to be worth considering in terms of gravity. The total fraction of energy in the universe which is in the form of photons is much less than 1% and practically unconstrained by measurements (only upper limit). In the early universe, radiation dominated the energy density and was important.

The only thing that we know that makes gravity is energy because this is what general relativity tells us. Energy mass and gravity (space curvature) are different faces of the same phenomenon. Then astrophysics encountered issues with this description on the cosmological scale - hence dark matter and dark energy were added to the models. Currently they are just place-holders and you may claim that these are not matter and energy but something else that affects gravity. There are plenty of theories that try to explain this dark stuff in other ways: from extra dimensions (that must be warped) to including acceleration as a parameter in gravity.

[Gh0stFT]

I'm not sure that collider's are going to teach us much other than what pieces matter can be broken into.

are you serious?

in short (very short)
its all about how all started, how particles formed and matter build up, after the we call it "Big Bang"
Colliders create new massive particles, one day we maybe found out how/why elementary particles
getting different masses at their Birthday. One (1) of the things they try to find is the Higgs boson.
It is a hypothetical massive elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model of particle physics,
that explains how most of the known elementary particles become massive.