March 24, 2002, 17:49
|
#1
|
Deity
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Posts: 16,064
|
Gravity?
I rose from the seat of ease the other day, and noticed how I no longer feel that I am winning the battle against gravity. Sure, I've put on some weight, perhaps 20 lbs over, but in my heart I know that it is my age that is telling.
Anyway, it got me thinking about gravity, that funny, unaccountable force.
As I looked down at the tile bathroom floor, towards the center of the earth itself, I considered... Where was the force eminating from that has begun to give me such a fight? Well, from everywhere in which there was anything according to science. The very tile itself was pulling at me...a little, and I at it, small consolation. In fact I am pulling at the earth, at the planets, at the sun and all the universe. I am pulling on everything, though the force is feeble, and the farther away the weaker it gets. Still, when you consider the amount of matter in the universe, to exert any pull at all on every bit of it must require a tremendous force, exerted over fantastic distances, yes?
My point is, how can my body, or that tile or any bit of matter continueously exert force without expending fuel of some kind? This whole galaxy is spinning because gravity is constantly pulling. If gravity were to run out of energy then the galaxy would fly apart. Yet even the smallest speck of sand never ever stops pulling for all eternity.
I mean, wtf?
__________________
I'm not profane, I type the stars.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:05
|
#2
|
Emperor
Local Time: 01:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
|
force is only exerted if there is a body which is away from the body that exerts gravitation. that's newton's explanation.
modern physics says that mass actually makes the time-space continuum around it curve so it is attracted to the center of gravity.
or am I wrong?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:10
|
#3
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Fear and Oil
Posts: 5,892
|
The force does use a sort of "fuel." That fuel would be gravitational potential energy.
Quote:
|
I am pulling on everything, though the force is feeble, and the farther away the weaker it gets.
|
Actually, say, the force between you and the earth is enormous. Only because the earth is so massive does it experience little acceleration from humans.
__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:13
|
#4
|
Emperor
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,491
|
It's Lancer thread week again
I've got Europa Universalis now, quite the fun game
As for the topic - gravity works just like electric fields
For both you can use the very simple field model, the only difference would be there is no such thing as negative gravity. And both can only be explained with quantum physics if you want to do it properly. But I'm not there yet
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:25
|
#5
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
Quote:
|
My point is, how can my body, or that tile or any bit of matter continueously exert force without expending fuel of some kind?
|
"Fuel" is not expended when a force is exerted. Only if the object moves whilst experiencing a force* is "fuel" expended. Besides the universe is very good at conserveing energy, comets speed up and slow down all the time but "loss of gravity fuel" is not an issue.
* That is a force in the same direction as the motion
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:39
|
#6
|
Local Time: 09:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Skanky Father
Posts: 16,530
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Ecthelion
...there is no such thing as negative gravity.
|
Never been proven.
__________________
I'm building a wagon! On some other part of the internets, obviously (but not that other site).
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 18:48
|
#7
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Never been proven.
|
If negative gravity existed it could end up powering a perpetual motion machine. Thus it is rejected as a notion by many.
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:04
|
#8
|
King
Local Time: 08:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: of my princess Anastasia!
Posts: 2,102
|
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:07
|
#9
|
Emperor
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,491
|
quite a dumb logic.... if it wasn't for electromagnetic force, nothing around us would exist, how does that sound?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:10
|
#10
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
Better than the current hell we live in.
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:18
|
#11
|
Prince
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hint: the flag
Posts: 362
|
Quote:
|
I am pulling on everything, though the force is feeble, and the farther away the weaker it gets.
|
Actually, the further away you get from the center of the mass, the more the potential energy increases and the stronger the force. To a certain point, that is.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:22
|
#12
|
King
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: of Candle'Bre
Posts: 1,804
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Juggernaut
Actually, the further away you get from the center of the mass, the more the potential energy increases and the stronger the force. To a certain point, that is.
|
That point would be the surface of the body under consideration. Above the surface, the force decreases. Sure the GPE increases, but what's that got to do with the price of bananas?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:25
|
#13
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
How do you figure that one out, or are you refering to Gaussian shapes?
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:25
|
#14
|
King
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: of Candle'Bre
Posts: 1,804
|
SD - who does that refer to?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:27
|
#15
|
Emperor
Local Time: 18:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Fort LOLderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Posts: 9,091
|
Gravity sucks!
__________________
Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:30
|
#16
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Chowlett
SD - who does that refer to?
|
Juggernaut.
A result of having several windows open means I missed your post.
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:33
|
#17
|
Emperor
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,491
|
he just thought higher potential energy means more force, what balls
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:39
|
#18
|
Prince
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Augusta Vindelicorum
Posts: 655
|
A force itself doesn't need any fuel. If you tighten a rope between two rods, the rope exerts a constant force without any refuelling. Fuel is energy, not force. When you move something against a force, you spend energy.
This is partly why physicists rarely think in terms of a force. Energy seems to be more abstract at first but its a much easier concept. Force is not wrong, but simply more complicated. Also mathematically.
Gravity cannot "run out of energy". The gravitational field exists. You expend or gain energy if you move something in a gravitational field. When the moon comes a bit closer to earth it gains energy from the gravitational field and becomes faster, i. e. its kinetic energy increases. When it moves away from earth it becomes slower. The sum of the kinetic energy and the energy gained from/given to gravitation remains constant. (in this simple picture, that is).
__________________
Why doing it the easy way if it is possible to do it complicated?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:39
|
#19
|
Deity
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Posts: 16,064
|
"It's Lancer thread week again"-Ecthelion
You must admit Ecthelion, it's been a while.
Thanks for are the replies, I'm still trying to figure it all out.
__________________
I'm not profane, I type the stars.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:40
|
#20
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
|
Not soooo wrong.
Quote:
|
he just thought higher potential energy means more force, what balls
|
A greater rate in change of potential (with respect to distance) would.
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:45
|
#21
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Canada where else...
Posts: 4,178
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Gravity sucks!
|
The Earth has no gravity it sucks
__________________
“The Communist Manifesto was correct…but…we see the privileges of the capitalist bourgeoisie yielding…to democratic organizations…In my judgment…success lies in a steady [peaceful] advance…[rather]…than in…a catastrophic crash."Eduard Bernstein
Or do we?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:47
|
#22
|
Deity
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Posts: 16,064
|
What is a 'graviton'? A fanciful invention of the writers of Star Trek? Anyone?
__________________
I'm not profane, I type the stars.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:51
|
#23
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Fear and Oil
Posts: 5,892
|
Quote:
|
How do you figure that one out, or are you refering to Gaussian shapes?
|
Yep, Gauss' law works.
Flux(F/m) = [rho]/some constant (whatever the gravitational analogue to the permitivity constant is)
F = GMmr/||r||^3
And M = [rho]4[pi]||r||^3/3
So F = 4/3*G[rho][pi]mr
__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Last edited by Ramo; March 24, 2002 at 20:10.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:54
|
#24
|
Emperor
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,491
|
*head explodes after only looking at Ramo's post*
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Lancer
What is a 'graviton'? A fanciful invention of the writers of Star Trek? Anyone?
|
it's a gravity quantum
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:55
|
#25
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Fear and Oil
Posts: 5,892
|
The graviton is the supposed (we don't know if it exists, hell we don't know if gravity can be renormalizable QFT) force carrier for gravity.
__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:58
|
#26
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Germans own my soul.
Posts: 14,861
|
Oh don't turn this all mathematical. It isn't pleasant, it doesn't help Lancer one jot and just scares people away.
Stop it now you naughty children
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 19:58
|
#27
|
Prince
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Augusta Vindelicorum
Posts: 655
|
A graviton is a concept among those physicists who try to unify the General Relativity with Quantum Theory (which still are not entirely compatible). For SMAC fans: It's "Unified Field Theory".
The basic idea is that if for the electromagnetic field there is the photon as exchange particle, i. e. which communicates the interaction between electromagnetically charged particles, the Weak Interaction has W- and Z- Bosons and the Strong Interaction, which binds quarks in the nucleus of an atom, has the gluons, there should be a similar particle for gravity. There are no experimental proofs for their existence, but some experiments are planned which *might* find them ...
So, at the moment I would regard gravitons as a well-founded speculation.
Not invented by Star Trek
__________________
Why doing it the easy way if it is possible to do it complicated?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 20:04
|
#28
|
Deity
Local Time: 22:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Posts: 16,064
|
Geeez guys...
A simple 'we don't know' would have sufficed.
__________________
I'm not profane, I type the stars.
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 20:05
|
#29
|
Prince
Local Time: 23:09
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 522
|
Gravity...
I've always wondered - does Archimedes Principle still hold true in space? If so, couldn't the bouyant force it generates offset the effects which the absence of gravity causes in astronauts?
This is all theoretical of course, because unless it filled completely a sealed container it would float around the place. But still, could any of the physicists out there tell me how this law behaves in the absence of gravity?
|
|
|
|
March 24, 2002, 20:05
|
#30
|
Emperor
Local Time: 00:09
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,491
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:09.
|
|