Physics Question

[sooey]

whereas no-one knows what gravity is.

Gravity, however, is a fundamental property of space that cannot exist without the space/mass that produced it

Your nobel prize is on it's way joe.

 

[chapeau]

LOL sooey.

Sometimes it's just too easy.

He said the same about photons....

 

[jeds]

Tonka, I follow your argument most of the way but I'm struggling with the following: Your explanation makes it sound like the gravitons beaming towards the Earth in space can have a holding effect on their own with no body to pull against. In other words right up to the point that the last graviton arrives at the Earth the Earth would be held by those gravitons. But how can this be? Do the two bodies held together by gravity not rely on each other for stability. More akin to a rope holding two bodies together. Cut the rope holding the Sun and earth together and the effect would be instant. One part of the rope would fly off with one of the bodies and the other with the other. The rope could not hold either in place on it's own.

Think of the rope being shaken to produce a wave that travels along it, now make that rope very very long stop shaking the end suddenly. It'll take a while for the pre-existing waves already on the rope to cease and the rope to become still. That's a reasonable analogy

Thanks.

Can I take this another step. The waves on the rope must have a cumulative effect. The more of them there are the more the effect. Lets say more waves = more gravitatianal force. With the sun in place the rope is full of waves = maximum gravitational force. Take the sun away and the waves don't disappear immediately but they must reduce. So there are two possibilities; one is that gravity remains at maximum whilst any number of waves remain in the rope. Those waves career towards Earth and when the last one arrives the Earth flies off into space. This doesn't seem logical to me. A more obvious answer is that the reduction in gravitational force would be very small to begin with but would steadily increase as the waves reduce. So the Earth may not immediately fly off as if there was no gravity but it would notice an instant effect that would increase until the waves were completely decayed. And of course that reduction would be non-linear because of the rapidly inceasing distance.

PS. (to others - not Tonka) If you can't give an answer to this without adding an insult I'd prefer you didn't bother.

 

[joe-90]

I don't know what it is, only its properties.

 

[joe-90]

Can I take this another step. The waves on the rope must have a cumulative effect. The more of them there are the more the effect. Lets say more waves = more gravitatianal force. With the sun in place the rope is full of waves = maximum gravitational force. Take the sun away and the waves don't disappear immediately but they must reduce. So there are two possibilities; one is that gravity remains at maximum whilst any number of waves remain in the rope. Those waves career towards Earth and when the last one arrives the Earth flies off into space. This doesn't seem logical to me. A more obvious answer is that the reduction in gravitational force would be very small to begin with but would steadily increase as the waves reduce. So the Earth may not immediately fly off as if there was no gravity but it would notice an instant effect that would increase until the waves were completely decayed. And of course that reduction would be non-linear because of the rapidly inceasing distance.

PS. (to others - not Tonka) If you can't give an answer to this without adding an insult I'd prefer you didn't bother.

But what would the gravity rope be anchored to if the Sun were to disappear? Wouldn't it be similar to a car cutting its tow rope? Wouldn't the gravity rope then belong to the next largest body - the earth? Why should it stay in place when its anchor has gone? And how can gravity exist if the mass that created it has gone? No mass - no distortion of space - no gravity.

 

[calorific]

Joe already alluded to this, and I can;t really fathom an answer to it - what replaces the space "left" after the sun suddenly disappears. More to the point, how quickly?

 

[sooey]

It would be full of opal fruits.

 

[chapeau]

Not long before Joe tells us it's all nonsense because the Earth is really held up in Space by a tortoise and when you ask him what's the tortoise standing on he'll say "It's Turtles all the way down"

(with apologies to Hawking)

 

[joe-90]

I see you've ditched any credible attempt to give credible answers. It won't go un-noticed.

 

[calorific]

Indeed it hasn't

 

[sooey]

Joe already alluded to this, and I can;t really fathom an answer to it - what replaces the space "left" after the sun suddenly disappears. More to the point, how quickly?

Matter has never been seen to disappear. Maybe there's a good reason for that, Perhaps the whole universe would implode into the "void", like water down a plughole.

 

[sooey]

My answer was credible, they didn't rename opal fruits as starburst for nothing.

 

[calorific]

Joe already alluded to this, and I can;t really fathom an answer to it - what replaces the space "left" after the sun suddenly disappears. More to the point, how quickly?

Matter has never been seen to disappear. Maybe there's a good reason for that, Perhaps the whole universe would implode into the "void", like water down a plughole.

Where to?

 

[sooey]

The celestial sewerage works.
Where all the used up universes end up.

 

[calorific]

The celestial sewerage works.
Where all the used up universes end up.

Science is easy for some people. I really envy you