Image not available

1200x675

1719929607778.jpg

đŸ§” Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16264332

What drives gravity?

Anonymous No. 16264383

>>16264332
Mass.
Are you asking
>why do the fundaments of the universe exist?
God.

Anonymous No. 16264384

>>16264383
Where is the energy to move such mass coming from?

Anonymous No. 16264389

>>16264384
Gravity.

Anonymous No. 16264452

To my understanding it is now known, so God is a fitting answer. There's potentially a particle called the Graviton that is exchanged between particles. This exchange is where the energy comes from.

Anonymous No. 16264461

>>16264332
bed sheet is a good example to visualize but the sheet itself is a material with qualities. how do you bend the space which is supposed to be absolutely nothing. how can movement even happen in nothing? sorry if I sound retarded but I just don't understand this

Anonymous No. 16264486

>>16264332
Local energy potential

Anonymous No. 16264487

>>16264486
DOES POTENTIAL MEAN 'CHANCE OF?'

Anonymous No. 16264491

>>16264487
No

Anonymous No. 16264492

>>16264486
There's a chance of local energy, is what you mean retard. No such phrase as local energy potential. Listen retard, it's called 'going to school and learning what all the faggy Government shills are teaching you' - don't do it. You'll die.

Anonymous No. 16264749

>>16264332
god

Anonymous No. 16264835

>>16264332
dark matter

Anonymous No. 16264877

>>16264332
your mom's fat ass

Anonymous No. 16264940

>>16264461
Bed sheet is not a good example at all. Because, the popsci way is to put a bigass ball there and see the warping, other small balls move in that warp etc. it's bad example because it uses gravity to define gravity thus circular in logic. If you put the ball and sheet in space without any gravity, the ball would essentially just touch and float there, you wouldn't see the warping.

Anonymous No. 16264948

>>16264940
What's a better example or way of visualizing it, then?

Anonymous No. 16264963

>>16264948
Idk I learned it in an abstract way. It's called parallel transport. Say you've a vector pointing north. Now move this vector in a closed loop on your manifold such that it stays perpendicular to the manifold. If the vector still points exactly to the north after you move through that loop and end where you started, the space is flat. Else it has an intrinsic curvature, which can be quantified by Riemann curvature tensor for eg. Contraction of this tensor gives you ricci tensor and scalar which further define how much the volume of sheared in that curved space. For massive objects, Einstein equation gives ricci tensor, thereby the space must have some intrinsic curvature.

Image not available

1080x2400

Screenshot_202406....jpg

Anonymous No. 16264968

Definitely particles

Anonymous No. 16265079

>>16264332
What’s the relationship between the Higgs field, mass, and the warping of space/time?

Anonymous No. 16265114

>>16264948
Imagine a ping pong ball submerged in the middle of a swimming pool. The water surrounding the ball is “space.” Pretend this ball has 1000 tiny holes in it and it is vacuuming water into it at a stead pace from all directions. Anything in the water close enough to the ball begins to move towards it. Space is the water you are in. Gravity is the vacuuming of space into mass.

Anonymous No. 16265749

>>16264332
Gravity pulls everybody down.

Anonymous No. 16265887

>>16264332
At the big bang what was once whole, shattered into countless pieces, now shit is trying to get back together.

>inb4 muh expanding space
Yeah, whatever. That's just interpetation of data.

Anonymous No. 16265957

>>16265887
So you're saying that once the universe is equalised, it will collapse into a singularity, starting the cycle all over again and destroying all possible evidence of the previous universe?

Anonymous No. 16265975

>>16264332
There are little tiny space particles in all the vacuum that talk to each other to indicate that matter is nearby, and to pull it in.
(If you think this sounds retarded, congratulations, you believe string theorists, quantum gravity theorists, and anyone else who applies quantum field theory in any capacity to gravity is a lunatic schizophrenic)

Anonymous No. 16265977

>>16265114
So stars have trillions of holes punctured into it?

Anonymous No. 16266070

>>16265975
>you believe string theorists, quantum gravity theorists, and anyone else who applies quantum field theory in any capacity to gravity is a lunatic schizophrenic)
Yes.

Anonymous No. 16266341

>>16264332
It's the two objects averaging out. Like how when you mix hot and cold water.

Anonymous No. 16266369

>>16264383

>Mass

But gravity is only "turned on" once a certain mass is achieved. Small bodies of mass don't work or cause objects to orbit around them (hence it can't be replicated here on Earth).

Anonymous No. 16266715

>>16265977
Yes, trillions of Planck sized holes sucking up space.

Anonymous No. 16266723

>>16266369
Wrong.

Anonymous No. 16266725

>>16264332
it's magnets, op. the absolute state of this ""science"" board ffs

Anonymous No. 16266728

>>16266715
are they per chance black holes?

Anonymous No. 16266731

>>16264452
>>16264383
>god of the gaps
It was actually magic fairies that pull everything together, and you can't prove otherwise.

Image not available

1102x749

t4cdd7j2sww11.jpg

Anonymous No. 16266734

>>16266731
Neither can you

Anonymous No. 16266735

>>16266734
Exactly, so it's fairies. Glad we can agree.

Anonymous No. 16266739

>>16266734
Quantum science is fake and gay.

Anonymous No. 16266816

>>16266739
Countries and companies wouldn't be spending over $2 billion on quantum computing r&d every year if it was simply fake and didn't work at all.

Anonymous No. 16266818

>>16266816
(((((Countries))))) and (((((companies)))))

Anonymous No. 16266840

>>16266818
"The Jews" stand to gain a lot more money from quantum computing being real than from just using it as some kind of laundering front

Anonymous No. 16267036

>>16264332
Electromagnetism, Professor Terrance Howard has explained it on the Joe Rogan Experience, the podcast.

Anonymous No. 16267044

>>16264383
>mass
Modern physics is so baked with nihilism that you think this is an answer. Like you actually are unable to explain things and instead wave your hands. Einstein's legacy

Anonymous No. 16267047

>>16264332
Time is like a fluid that we are all moving through. 2 objects moving through time are pulled toward each other for the same reason that 2 trucks on the highway are attracted: The air moving around them produces a vacuum between them.

>>16264383
>>16264389
>>16264452
retards. I could name 10 different underlying physical mechanisms that would account for gravity, but you couldn't name one

Anonymous No. 16267048

>>16267047
>I could name 10 different underlying physical mechanisms that would account for gravity, but you couldn't name one
thanks.

Anonymous No. 16267082

Would it be possible that gravity isn't all objects attracting each other, but rather, all objects in the universe repelling each other?

Anonymous No. 16267156

>>16266731
Equating God with fairies is the type of category error only an atheist could make.

Anonymous No. 16267159

>>16267156
>le category error
Demonstrate that the fairies aren't powerful enough to cause gravity.

Anonymous No. 16267260

>>16264332

Time warp causes gravity. There is a deep connection between time amd gravity.

Anonymous No. 16267294

>>16264332
>pic
A big heavy object like a planet makes the fabric of spacetime bend a lot, and this bending of the fabric of spacetime is what we call gravity. But what is causing the planet to be so heavy that it can cause spacetime to bend in the first place? Isn’t heaviness itself caused by gravity? (Eg lifting weights on the moon would be effortless because the moon has less gravity). Doesn’t this imply that gravity causes gravity?

Anonymous No. 16267364

>>16264332
Matter displaces ether, and the ether doesn't like it and wants to reocuppy the space the mass took up and drives everything with it towards that direction

Image not available

175x133

spacetime.jpg_ful....jpg

Anonymous No. 16267384

>>16267294

Energy warps space time. Any amount of energy does it. It is normally unnoticed because spacetime is not that elastic, and you need tons of energy to make it bend at all. Energy, whether in the form of mass or radiation, can bend spacetime. The amount of bending depends on the energy density. The majority of the mass in atoms comes from gluonic energy holding nucleons together, with a tiny amount due the Higgs field.

Anonymous No. 16267739

>>16266723

>What is critical mass.

Anonymous No. 16268030

>>16264332
Same thing that drives inertia.
As particle waves propagate, their longitudinal component stresses the aether lattice, changing its refractivity. This feeds back and influences the particle’s propagation, in a way ‘guided’ by the change of refractive index in its proximity, induced by itself - that’s what is referenced as inertial mass. Naturally, the influence on the refractive properties of the aether extends further, influencing other particles’ propagation. That’s gravity.

Anonymous No. 16268184

>>16267739
>what is critical mass
Your mom

Anonymous No. 16268187

>>16268030
Could you draw that on a napkin and show it to a bar maid?

Anonymous No. 16268280

>>16267159
demonstrate that they are

Anonymous No. 16268288

>>16268280
Drop an apple. There you go.

Anonymous No. 16269520

>>16268187
I already did.

Image not available

685x350

water-droplet.jpg

Anonymous No. 16269532

>>16269520
Point to the Aether lettuce?

Vegan No. 16269545

>>16264383
Based. /thread

Anonymous No. 16269547

>>16264332
Unsure. Physics (at least should) only attempt to describe nature as it is with models that are useful.

GR is our current best model.

GIVEN: it seems like space and time exist, AND mass/energy exists, AND masses tend to attract each other in predictable orbits, AND we want the equivalence principle, SR to work in the limit, Lorentz invariance, and Galilean relativity, THEN modelling the universe as being a Riemannian manifold (and everything else), THEN you get a very accurate-to-life picture of the universe we see.

That's all. All we're trying to do is describe the world we see through models of various sophistication to encapsulate more and more features of the real world. It's no different that modelling a soccer ball as a perfect sphere in a Euclidean space.

GR is background independent, so you give it the spacetime metric and it tells you the mass distribution and vice versa in the same way that y = x^2 either tells you the square or square root of a number depending on which of the variables you fill in first.

That's all.

If you want a deeper answer than that, you might get one, but you may run into the problem of infinite regress.

Sidestep the issue by just being ok with making a model of reality rather than asserting that the model is actual reality. Unfortunately, a lot of physicists today actually do mistake the map for the land.

Vegan No. 16269548

>>16265079
>warping of time
>still believing this Einsteinian meme

Anonymous No. 16269551

>>16264968

Space as modelled by QR and GR has properties. Permittivity, permeability, energy, curvature

Vegan No. 16269552

>>16266739
Some aspects of it, yes. Copenhagen interpretation and many worlds interpretation are both retarded. Special relativity is even more retarded.

Anonymous No. 16269622

>>16264332
energy seeking equilibrium. in this case mass bends the medium affecting other mass in its field of influence, giving rise to the temporal dimension as the mass strives to reach the lowest energy state. this interaction is lower dimensional holography, a projection of higher order information

Image not available

1024x1024

1719473401175811.jpg

Anonymous No. 16270058

If fat people ceased to exist, how would that impact the capacity of our planet to attract space objects?

Anonymous No. 16270063

>>16270058
It wouldn't affect it because the mass of the Earth will not change. We are all made of the Earth.

Anonymous No. 16270449

>>16269532
It would seem that the aether’s structure is an fcc crystal. At least its properties match with what a solid having an ideal fcc crystalline structure with spacing of Planck length would exhibit.
For just conceptualizing gravity, understanding the aether as a solid is enough.

Anonymous No. 16270451

>>16264332
Newtonian delusions

Anonymous No. 16270459

>>16270449
It aint easy when everything's a partical.

Anonymous No. 16270469

>>16270459
Exactly, mass has variations and complex relations, not like energy is just straight vectors

Anonymous No. 16270482

>>16270459
wdym

Anonymous No. 16270490

>>16270482
Imagine wireless charging? Life is hard as a particle.....

Anonymous No. 16270494

>>16270490
There is wireless charging, also wavelenght detection and effects is not exactly particles, no mass

Anonymous No. 16270623

>>16270494
>There is wireless charging
Including particles, Tell me how that works?

Anonymous No. 16272702

>>16264332
The ather torrent https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=121362

Image not available

700x462

alex jones ducks.jpg

Anonymous No. 16272736

That picture is overly simplified, there's no actual straight plane that is curved around the mass. It actually is not even a plane at all, imagine that image, except the curvature of it being from all possible sides. That's actually how it works. You're being fed lies, and you assume it to be correct.

Anonymous No. 16272738

>>16264332
your mom

Anonymous No. 16272809

>>16272736
So it could be presented in a 3D space as say, a heat map, where heavy objects emenate more "heat" (red), and empty space is "cold" (green) and that would be a more accurate representation?

Anonymous No. 16272822

Gravity is just a silly name for electromagnetism. Just like centrifugal force isn't real, it's just a property of momentum/inertia

Anonymous No. 16273137

Entropic gravity.

Image not available

757x607

curvature of spac....jpg

Anonymous No. 16274175

>>16272809
This is the most accurate way it can be depicted.
Anything else is pop-sci.

Anonymous No. 16274293

>>16264383
>>Mass.
Wrong. It's the other way around.
Distortions in spacetime are the source of mass.

Anonymous No. 16274295

>>16264332
gravity is a force

Anonymous No. 16274312

>>16264332
The Gravitrain.

Anonymous No. 16274316

>>16272736
>yes i would like a 4 dimensional phenomenon replicated as a static image for display on a two dimensional screen
fuck off tourist

Anonymous No. 16274998

>>16266731
>Le god of the gaps
>the philosophical construct of God is equivalent to its fairy variant
Why are atheists so braindead?

Anonymous No. 16275028

>>16274998
You made no argument to say it's not.

Anonymous No. 16275046

>>16266369
>he doesn't know that pebbles have even smaller pebbles orbiting them in space

Anonymous No. 16275420

>>16264332
jewish magic

Anonymous No. 16275431

>>16264332
my ballsack nigga

Anonymous No. 16275433

>>16270063
are you serious

Anonymous No. 16275449

>>16264384
Gravity is an energy-neutral force. There's no net energy change from gravity.