Riding a "Magnet".

[OmegaX7]

:note: Hey all. I wonder, - - isn't the Earth a large magnet? So isn't gravity simply electromagnetic energy? Does electromagnetic attraction occure at the cellular, micro-biological "and " atomic level?? Is the magnetic field produced in the swirling eddies of iron within the earth's core? It seems the rotational motion of the earth must contribute to the strenth of the gravity field. Venus rotates every 237 days (=/- 1 or 2 days) and therfore has almost nile gravity, right?

Just wondered if anyone has any thoughts.

L8R

"After all is said and done, Gravity Rules."

[UncleAl]

You do not know any physics - none. You are too lazy to look up Venus' gravitation (0.905 gee). Those who know nothing in a subject would do well not to comment upon it unless and until they learn more.

 

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html

Mathematics of gravitation

 

Besides that... in General Relativity, spacetime in a set of events (or possible events). It has the following structures:

 

1. A causal structure, (says which events can influence other events, in other words which events are in the light cone of other events).

 

2. A topological structure (says which sets of events are open, allows us to define continuous functions). Since spacetime is a manifold, the local topology is that of R4 with the usual topology.

 

3. A differential structure (says which functions on the set of events are differentiable, allows tangent vectors and other tensors).

 

4. A metric (defines the inner product of tangent vectors, and thus arc length along paths). This is restricted by the causal structure, in that casually connected events must be connectable by paths which are everywhere timelike.

 

5. A torsion-free metric connection (says which vectors in different tangent spaces are parallel along curves ).

 

Space and time are coordinate choices on this manifold. The coordinate choice must be in the differential structure. Time is restricted by the causal structure in that positive time must point towards the forward light cone.

 

Take a good look at the Standard Model Lagrangian and see that all quark and lepton masses are induced by Yukawa couplings to the Higgs boson - not by the "m psibar psi" term that gives the electron its mass in quantum electrodynamics. See for example p. 119 of "Quarks, Leptons and Gauge Fields," 2nd ed by Kerson Huang.World Scientific Pub Co, Singapore (1992)

 

The Equivalence Principle tells us that Spacetime has a geodesic (projective) structure with a non-integrable connection. The Equivalence Principle distinguishes the metric theories of gravitation from non-metric theories.

 

Gauge-invariant action for gauge fields and fermions has the form

 

S = integral d^4x [-1/4 F_{mu,nu}F^{mu,nu} + psibar(i gamma^mu D_mu - m) psi].

 

Gauge boson masses: The quantity M^2 A_mu A^mu is not gauge invariant. Mases can be introduced in a gauge-invariant manner through a _Higgs scalar field_:

 

S_Higgs = integral d^4x[(D_mu psi)+ (D_mu psi) - V(psi+ psi)]

 

which acquires a non-zero vacuum expectation value.

 

When left- and right-handed chiral components of psi have different gauge transformation laws, the quantity m psibar psi = m psibar_L psi_R + m psibar_R psi_L is not gauge invariant either. In the standard electroweak theory, fermion masses can be generated in a gauge-invariant manner through Yukawa couplings to Higgs fields

 

deltaL = -f(lbar_e psi e+R + ebar_R psi+ l_e).

 

Maxwell-like (``vector'') gravitational equations fail for a number of reasons. Among the main ones:

 

1. In electromagnetism, like charges repel, while opposite charges attract. In particular, if you have three charges, they cannot all attract each other. (If charge 1 is positive and attracts charge 2, then charge 2 must be negative. Then what is charge 3?) The situation for gravity is clearly different.

 

You can try to alter Maxwell's equations so that like charges attract. To do so, though, you have to change signs in such a way that the energy of electromagnetic radiation comes out negative. This is a disaster (and would be for gravity): it would allow a pair of charges or masses to generate energy without limit by radiating away negative energy.

 

2. Even if you ignore the sign problem, radiation in a vector theory is emitted at a much faster rate than in a tensor theory like general relativity. For a pair of masses in GR, radiation depends on the rate of change of the quadrupole moment. For a pair of charges in Maxwell's theory, or a pair of masses in a vector theory of gravity, the radiation rate depends on the rate of change of the (much larger) dipole moment. This leads to predictions of gravitational radiation that disagree severely with observed decays of binary pulsar orbits.

 

3. A general vector theory of gravitation involves three adjustable parameters. These can be chosen, by hand, to predict the right precession of Mercury's perihelion (though GR has the advantage that no ad hoc choices are needed to get the right answer). But the resulting vector theory predicts no bending of light in a gravitational field, again disagreeing strongly with observation. See Robertson and Noonan, "Relativity and Cosmology," section 6.6.

 

4. In a vector theory of gravitation, the energy of the field itself does not gravitate. (The electromagnetic analog is that the electric field has no charge, and doesn't generate its own electric field.) But we know from observation---by comparing the Earth's and the Moon's motion toward the Sun---that gravitational binding energy *does* contribute to the gravitational field.

 

Vector theories of gravity are thus strongly ruled out by observation.

[OmegaX7]

Well, ;) - - - my stepfather hated me too, but I tolerated him quite well. You may notice that my post was phrased in questions for the most part. And yes, I was being lazy. I have far too many books to just jump and take time to research things I don't have memorized. As for my knowledge of physics - - yes, it's very limited. But only by an old injury.

Now, would you be "willing" to help someone of lesser intellect than yourself? ;) I'm only here 'cause I'd like to learn more. Perhaps you might help someone understand the workings of the cosmos. I don't want to ask much right now until I see if you want to attack :note: me again. If not, then could you give me some example or analogy that might explain to me why we cannot unifie gravity :note: and the electromagnetic force. They seem to be no more than two manifestations of the same force. You already assume that I'm very low functioning here, so keep it simple. ;)

L8R ----------- and thanks for at least answering.

[Fishteacher73]

Uncle AL stop being such a putz. It was a question. It may have been a bit under-researched but that was what hes was doing here.... If you have a problem with people asking questions go somewhere else. I won't have that type of attitude in my forum.

 

Thanks Fish.

[infamous]

Uncle AL stop being such a putz. It was a question. It may have been a bit under-researched but that was what hes was doing here.... If you have a problem with people asking questions go somewhere else. I won't have that type of attitude in my forum.

 

Thanks Fish.

 

Right on Fish; I think it's high time that we call a spade a spade. It should not be neccessary for any individual to attack anyone simply because they ask a question. There may be some here that feel they are beyond learning anything from anyone else. No doubt, many have demonstrated a high degree of intellect only to expose their lack of respect for others. Maybe it's time for them to listen to the sound of their own voice because it's the only voice they seem to appreciate.

 

LIsten if you will,

many thoughts, many choices.

Some only hear the sound,

of their own voices.

 

by Infamous

[OmegaX7]

Good morning all :) . (Opening Note; the rotational speed of Venus' single day = 243 Earth days.) It would seem that this may not be the only factor in it's lack of gravity, the spin, I mean. In the earth's case, the rotating,electrically conductive core is little more, in theory, than the dynamo Einstein peered into in his youth, isn't it?? doesn't a moving magnetic field produce electromagnetic energy?? Here, It seems,is where I need some help.

"WHY" cannot these two forces be unified??? It seems to me, in my limited knowledge, they are manifestasions of the same type of energy. "WHY" is this not yet the case? Is there an example or analogy that might convey to me how I'm deficient in grasping the complexitys here? If the core slowed to the surface speed "or" if the earth sped up to match the core's speed, would our gravity diminish? If they matched, it seems the disturbances which produce the dynamo effect would cease. Doesn't it seem that we're on a huge electromagnet?

L8R Good day.

[Fishteacher73]

Good morning all :) . (Opening Note; the rotational speed of Venus' single day = 243 Earth days.) It would seem that this may not be the only factor in it's lack of gravity, the spin, I mean.

 

 

Gravity is not a result of motion. Artificial gravity is producted by motion, but all it is is just a force. Gravity is a result of mass. Beyond that not a whole lot about what gravity is is known.

[infamous]

Good morning all :) . (Opening Note; the rotational speed of Venus' single day = 243 Earth days.) It would seem that this may not be the only factor in it's lack of gravity, the spin, I mean. In the earth's case, the rotating,electrically conductive core is little more, in theory, than the dynamo Einstein peered into in his youth, isn't it?? doesn't a moving magnetic field produce electromagnetic energy?? Here, It seems,is where I need some help.

"WHY" cannot these two forces be unified??? It seems to me, in my limited knowledge, they are manifestasions of the same type of energy. "WHY" is this not yet the case? Is there an example or analogy that might convey to me how I'm deficient in grasping the complexitys here? If the core slowed to the surface speed "or" if the earth sped up to match the core's speed, would our gravity diminish? If they matched, it seems the disturbances which produce the dynamo effect would cease. Doesn't it seem that we're on a huge electromagnet?

L8R Good day.

 

Actually OmegaX7 gravity and the electroweak force are different in many respects. For one thing, the electroweak force is approx. 1*10^36 times as strong as gravity. It will help your understanding if you were to Google a few links on gravity and also on the electroweak forces. Good luck with your investigation.

[C1ay]

Good morning all :) . (Opening Note; the rotational speed of Venus' single day = 243 Earth days.) It would seem that this may not be the only factor in it's lack of gravity, the spin, I mean.

Huh? Did you miss UA's post above? Venus' gravity is 90.5% that of the Earth (.905g), IOW a 100 lb. person on Earth would weigh 90.5 lbs. on Venus. Venus is devoid of magnetism but it has plenty of gravity for it's size as determined by it's mass, not it's magnetism or lack thereof.

[UncleAl]

It would seem that this may not be the only factor in it's lack of gravity, the spin, I mean. In the earth's case, the rotating,electrically conductive core is little more, in theory, than the dynamo Einstein peered into in his youth, isn't it??

All stooopidity requires to flourish is the disinterest of good men. You educate it, crush it at its source, or you drown in it thereafter.

[infamous]

All stooopidity requires to flourish is the disinterest of good men. You educate it, crush it at its source, or you drown in it thereafter.

It appears to most of us that you only wish to crush it.

[Queso]

why feed the stupid fire when you CAN crush it and destroy it at the source before it becomes a distracting waste of time? once it's crushed, not even a fringe remains, and you can progress. PROGRESS!

[infamous]

why feed the stupid fire when you CAN crush it and destroy it at the source before it becomes a distracting waste of time? once it's crushed, not even a fringe remains, and you can progress. PROGRESS!

I really don't think the purpose of this forum should be to crush the inquisitive but rather to inspire one to thought.

[bumab]

Huh? Did you miss UA's post above? Venus' gravity is 90.5% that of the Earth (.905g), IOW a 100 lb. person on Earth would weigh 90.5 lbs. on Venus. Venus is devoid of magnetism but it has plenty of gravity for it's size as determined by it's mass, not it's magnetism or lack thereof.

 

I think the origional post got a little confused in the wording. A slower spin would possibly affect the magnetic strength of the system, not the gravity of the system. That appears to be the confusion.