Gravity & Spacetime: How Mass/Energy Affects It

In summary, gravity affects particles with mass/energy. Matter defines spacetime (loosely speaking). Gravity is a pseudo-force that is proportional to mass. Einstein's General Relativity achieved exactly that feat.
  • #1
Tail
208
0
If I understand everything correctly, gravity affects particles with mass/energy. How can it possibly affect spacetime? Doesn't it have to "grab" something?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Bodies with mass/energy produce gravity which is the effect of bending space-time. Anything around that body has to follow a path determined by the curvature of the space-time.
 
  • #3
Hadn't occurred to me to think about it like that... gravity warps ONLY spacetime, it doesn't "pull" things.

That right?
 
  • #4
Originally posted by Tail
Hadn't occurred to me to think about it like that... gravity warps ONLY spacetime, it doesn't "pull" things.

That right?

Gravity *can* curve spacetime. I doesn't mean that in all cases that it does. And it can curve space as well as spacetime.

But matter reacts with matter - an matter defines spacetime (loosely speaking)

Pmb
 
  • #5
Originally posted by Tail
If I understand everything correctly, gravity affects particles with mass/energy. How can it possibly affect spacetime? Doesn't it have to "grab" something?
What about neutrinoes? Or other non realistic particles that matter!
 
  • #6
Originally posted by pmb
Gravity *can* curve spacetime. I doesn't mean that in all cases that it does.
When doesn't it? Can you mention at least one case?
And it can curve space as well as spacetime.
Spacetime includes space.

matter defines spacetime (loosely speaking)

That I cannot agree with, even though I don't know much about this.
 
  • #7


Originally posted by Twister
What about neutrinoes?

They have mass/energy.

Originally posted by Twister
Or other non realistic particles that matter!

What non realistic particles are you talking about?
 
  • #8
Originally posted by Tail
If I understand everything correctly, gravity affects particles with mass/energy. How can it possibly affect spacetime? Doesn't it have to "grab" something?
There's a story about gravity and relativity that is not told as often as it should. It goes back to Newton and is quite revealing of how physicists think.

You see, we are so used to think of gravity as a "force" that it doesn't occur to us there's something strange about it. What's strange about it is that it's somewhat "spooky", as it acts without physical contact between bodies. To us the concept seems ordinary, but it's well documented that Newton himself disliked the idea, and adopted it because he had no other option. In Newton's time electromagnetism was not known, and the idea of two bodies interacting across empty space was quite out of the ordinary.

Another problem revealed itself as time went on. The force of gravity has the peculiar feature of being proportional to mass. For physicists, that's a sure sign that it's not a force at all, but rather what they call a pseudo-force, something that seems to be a force simply because we are looking from the wrong perspective.

Imagine a closed truck with a box and a camera filming the box and the interior of the truck. The box is not attached to the floor while the camera is. If you are looking at the movie of the box, you will notice something interesting. When the truck is moving in a straight line, the box stays in place, but when the truck is turning the box appears to undergo acceleration in the opposite direction. From the perspective of the movie, it's as if the walls of the truck attract the box. From the perspective of someone watching the truck from the outside, it's clear that the box is just trying to follow its inertial path while the truck is being accelerated. The impression that the box is experiencing a force is an illusion.

How do you know if something is really experiencing a force or if it's just the appearance of a force? Well, one sure sign that you're not dealing with a real force is when the force is proportional to the mass of the object being accelerated. That is just too convenient to be correct. Gravity happens to be such a force (proportional to mass). Together with the fact that it's an ad-hoc solution conceived by Newton to explain planetary motion, physicists have always suspected gravity to be a pseudo-force. With that in mind, they set out to find the correct perspective which would reveal that objects appearing to be accelerated by gravitational forces are not accelerating at all.

Einstein's General Relativity achieved exactly that feat. In GR gravity is not a force but simply a feature of the geometry of the universe. Two objects moving in a "straight" line ("straight" from a GR perspective) are bound to collide, not because they are being accelerated, but because spacetime is not really "straight" the way we perceive it. To borrow from the truck analogy, it's as if we were the box while spacetime is the truck; we are constantly trying to move in a straight line but the truck is going around in circles and as such we experience acceleration.

So to answer your question, gravity does not affect particles with mass/energy, it's spacetime that does by the fact of being "curved". Just like a crooked road "affects" the load of a truck.

Hope this helps.
 
  • #9
Tale wrote
When doesn't it? Can you mention at least one case?Spacetime includes space.[/B]
I can give you three examples

(1) A uniform gravitational field
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/uniform_field.htm

(2) A straight cosmic string cosmic string
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/cosmic_string.htm

(3) A vacuum domain wall.
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/domain_wall.htm


Spacetime includes space.
Obviously. However I think you missed my point. It's possible for space to be flat and spacetime be curved. In fact that's exactly the case for a flat universe - I.e. in a flat universe space is flat = however spacetime is curved.

Pete
 
  • #10


Originally posted by Doctor Luz
They have mass/energy.



What
non realistic particles are you talking about?
Hello DOC, I am thinking virtual particles.Yes neutrinoes have a little mass as they say.Condensed high frequency powerfull points of energy are always full of something.
 
  • #11
They still have mass/energy.(Albeit temporarily) Hence Hawking Radiation.
 
  • #12
mass.

FZ, That tells me that matter is either made by the spontainious episode or that matter is a result of,or virtual particles bring mass with them.From a mass origen.The question is ---What piece of anything does not have mass.The ether must be the origen of this substance.
 
  • #13
Er... no... The existence of virtual particles is due to quantum uncertainty, where probability creates so called "quantum foam". The nature of this "foam" is very different from classical ether.
 
  • #14
lost it

I replied to you,my post was lost due to pop ups sorry.Bottom line where do virtual particles come from!
 
  • #15
Field fluctuations or something like that.
 
  • #16
field fluctuations

The field must condense in certain points to produce a particle,And the low energy level or stability must make it decay as fast as it poped into existence. For on to stay in our dimension it would seem it needs more ummph.More energy to stabalize it and to be taken care of by other photons of the same frequency nearby.
 
  • #17
Rubber Sheet Analogy

I know you have all heard the rubber sheet analogy when it comes to general relativity. If not this is it in layman's terms: If you were to stretch a sheet of rubber and put a bowling ball in the center it would depress the rubber. Now any object (round) placed on the outer edge of the depression will roll towards the heavier object, i.e. gravitational pull. But there is one flaw in this...while the bowling ball makes a depression in the rubber because "gravity of earth" pulls it down...the depression in space-time IS gravity, not an effect of gravity. So you can't say that a planet's "gravity" causes a bend in space-time, because that bend in space-time IS gravity. Just making a point, goodnight and Godspeed.
 
  • #18
Two sides

There is always two sides to every depression!The mass indenting spacetime causing more mass to fall or get pulled or close its orbit to collide with the bowling ball also has a indent into the spacetime it is denting--Does this make any sense!Almost a oposite reaction on the --other side.The push of spacetime reflects or is opposed to anti matter .Just looking on the other side! TWISTER
 
  • #19


Originally posted by Twister
There is always two sides to every depression!The mass indenting spacetime causing more mass to fall or get pulled or close its orbit to collide with the bowling ball also has a indent into the spacetime it is denting--Does this make any sense!Almost a oposite reaction on the --other side.The push of spacetime reflects or is opposed to anti matter .Just looking on the other side! TWISTER

I believe the situation you are describing reffers to negative energy, not antimatter. Nagative energy (and whatever negative matter might be created from it) is gravitationally repulsive. Though I've not seen experimental data, it has been side several times here in the Forums that antimatter is attracted by gravity.
 
  • #20


Originally posted by LURCH
I believe the situation you are describing reffers to negative energy, not antimatter. Nagative energy (and whatever negative matter might be created from it) is gravitationally repulsive. Though I've not seen experimental data, it has been side several times here in the Forums that antimatter is attracted by gravity.
Sorry,New here! Should the anti-matter be attracted to ant-gravity?
 
  • #21


Originally posted by Twister
Sorry,New here! Should the anti-matter be attracted to ant-gravity?

That is not the generally held view, no. Again, I have not seen laboratory varification of this. Indeed, I can't imagine how one would go about varifying it experimentally with the tiny amounts and short duration of the antimatter we have so far been able to create. But the general consensus among particle physicists seems to be that both matter and antimatter are attracted by gravity. Antigravity, if it exists, would be generated by negative energy, and should repel both matter and antimatter.

However, I would assume that negative energy is attracted by antigravity. But this is just a supposition on my part.
 
  • #22
last stand.

Has anyone chacked out MCcoin unikef theory?
 
  • #23
Theory

Speaking of theories, the so called "vortex theory" is almost one of the dumbest things I have ever read. I went to that website and the author makes no clear hypothesis and states no real theory at all. Of course every one is entitled to their own opinion and I might be wrong. Also, I will check out that mccoin unikef theory. Thanks
 

1. What is gravity and how does it work?

Gravity is a force of attraction between objects with mass. It is the result of the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass or energy. This curvature causes objects to move towards each other, creating the force we know as gravity.

2. How does mass/energy affect spacetime?

Mass and energy are the sources of gravity and they affect spacetime by curving it. The more mass or energy an object has, the more it curves the fabric of spacetime, resulting in a stronger gravitational pull.

3. What is the relationship between mass/energy and gravity?

The relationship between mass/energy and gravity is described by Einstein's theory of general relativity. It states that mass and energy are equivalent and can be converted into each other, and both affect the curvature of spacetime, resulting in the force of gravity.

4. How does gravity affect the motion of objects?

Gravity affects the motion of objects by causing them to move towards each other. This can result in objects orbiting around each other, falling towards each other, or even accelerating towards each other depending on their mass and distance.

5. Can gravity be manipulated or controlled?

Currently, we do not have the technology or understanding to manipulate or control gravity. However, various theories and experiments are being explored, such as the possibility of creating artificial gravitational fields through advanced technology or harnessing the power of gravitational waves.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
10
Views
373
Replies
4
Views
519
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
485
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
933
Back
Top