A thought on gravity...

[Artabasdos]

Does anyone else think that gravity could essentially be a force created by the interaction between matter & anti-matter, similar to the force of positive and negative magnetism? Only in this case anti-matter creates an even force around a body of matter, repelling each other enough to keep the mass of matter in a Constant shape?

 

Or, maybe they attract each other instead. In equal balance so one doesn't overwhelm the other. Maybe this creates time too. Sort of acting on the principle of a railgun. This might also help explain why time slows down the further you move away from a solid mass such as Earth.

 

Hope I explained that clearly enough!

Edited February 25, 2017 by Artabasdos

[Daecon]

I thought time moved slower the closer you got to a source of gravity...

Edited February 25, 2017 by Daecon

[Klaynos]

Does anyone else think that gravity could essentially be a force created by the interaction between matter & anti-matter, similar to the force of positive and negative magnetism? Only in this case anti-matter creates an even force around a body of matter, repelling each other enough to keep the mass of matter in a Constant shape?

 

Or, maybe they attract each other instead. In equal balance so one doesn't overwhelm the other. Maybe this creates time too. Sort of acting on the principle of a railgun. This might also help explain why time slows down the further you move away from a solid mass such as Earth.

 

Hope I explained that clearly enough!

No, this doesn't agree with what we observe about antimatter or Gravity.

 

For this to be seriously considered you'd need a mathematical model.

[imatfaal]

I thought time moved slower the closer you got to a source of gravity...

 

Yeah. The weaker the gravitational potential (ie the further from the source) the faster the clock ticks compared to one at higher potential

[Lord Antares]

So little is known about dark matter that any speculations are practically useless.

What we think about it is irrelevant anyway, as it can't be proved or disproved.

 

Everyone has a good speculation, but almost no one can prove it.

[Klaynos]

So little is known about dark matter that any speculations are practically useless.

What we think about it is irrelevant anyway, as it can't be proved or disproved.

 

Everyone has a good speculation, but almost no one can prove it.

OP does not mention dark matter...

 

We do know some small things about dark matter so some speculations can be discarded.

[Lord Antares]

Oh, sorry. It's anti-matter.

But still, the central point still stands. Even though you can speculate for good fun, no post will contribute to the knowledge of what is being talked up, unless it's backed up by evidence. Just saying.

 

We don't know enough to be able to say how valid or invalid this is.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Lord Antares

[Strange]

Does anyone else think that gravity could essentially be a force created by the interaction between matter & anti-matter, similar to the force of positive and negative magnetism? Only in this case anti-matter creates an even force around a body of matter, repelling each other enough to keep the mass of matter in a Constant shape?

 

 

No. No one else thinks that. Some of the reasons are:

 

1. There are only minute amounts of anti-matter around. Mainly in the form of positrons formed during beta decay. So most objects do not contain any antimatter.

 

2. There is no reason why anti-matter would behave differently (i.e. negatively) with respect to gravity than ordinary matter.

 

3. There is no evidence of gravity that repels.

 

4. We already have a very successful theory of gravity, so what does your idea add?

 

Apart from that, welcome to the forum. Congratulations on being imaginative and interested in science.

[Eise]

Does anyone else think that gravity could essentially be a force created by the interaction between matter & anti-matter, similar to the force of positive and negative magnetism? Only in this case anti-matter creates an even force around a body of matter, repelling each other enough to keep the mass of matter in a Constant shape?

 

This a misconception about what anti-matter is. Anti-matter is exactly the same as our matter. If one would like to make fun, one could say that our world is made up of anti-matter, and there is nearly no matter in the universe. You couldn't tell the difference (ok some tiny effects...). An anti-electron (a positron) has exactly the same mass as an electron, but it is opposite in nearly all its properties: it is positively charged, where the electron is negative (but imagine that in history people would have used opposite conventions for what is positive or negative, then we had negative atomic nuclei, with positive electrons around it); its lepton number is -1, where the electron has +1.

This means that when an electron and a positron get together, conservation laws of charge and lepton number allow anything to happen, as long as the nett result is zero. But their mass (or energy) cannot not just disappear: so if they are moving slowly, no other particles than photons can appear, taking away the energy of the electron and the positron.

 

But a world of anti-matter would have exactly the same gravity as our matter. Anti-matter is matter build up from anti-particles, but it is not anti-mass. Newton's laws are exactly the same for stones and anti-stones.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Eise

[Artabasdos]

I thought time moved slower the closer you got to a source of gravity...

In Einstein's model yes. The bending of space time around a gravitational mass will cause a nominal slowing. However, as observed on astronomical bodies and astronauts etc, time also slows down, theoretically, because of velocity.

No. No one else thinks that. Some of the reasons are:

 

1. There are only minute amounts of anti-matter around. Mainly in the form of positrons formed during beta decay. So most objects do not contain any antimatter.

 

2. There is no reason why anti-matter would behave differently (i.e. negatively) with respect to gravity than ordinary matter.

 

3. There is no evidence of gravity that repels.

 

4. We already have a very successful theory of gravity, so what does your idea add?

 

Apart from that, welcome to the forum. Congratulations on being imaginative and interested in science.

 

You seem to misunderstand me.

 

1) I actually meant dark matter, not anti-matter. Serves me right for trying to be clever at 2am.

 

2) See above.

 

3) I was stating that gravity is maybe a byproduct of matter and dark matter's interaction. I'm not stating it as an anti-force of any kind.

 

4) Successful but not perfect. That's why I consider it a good idea to probe it relentlessly!

 

Thank you!

 

OP does not mention dark matter...

We do know some small things about dark matter so some speculations can be discarded.

But that's actually what I meant, not anti-matter. Serves me right for trying to think at 2am! XD Edited February 25, 2017 by Artabasdos

[Strange]

In Einstein's model yes. The bending of space time around a gravitational mass will cause a nominal slowing. However, as observed on astronomical bodies and astronauts etc, time also slows down, theoretically because of velocity.

 

 

As we have measured (and make use of) both gravitational time dilation and that due to relative motion, I don't know what you mean by "nominal" or "theoretically". These are both real effects.

 

But that's actually what I meant, not am. Serves me right for trying to think at 2am! XD

 

1. There are only minute amounts of dark matter around us. The density is probably something like 10^-25 g cm^-3 (in other words, close to a vacuum). So not enough to have any measurable effect.

 

2. There is no reason why dark matter would behave differently (i.e. negatively) with respect to gravity than ordinary matter. In fact, the only reason it is postulated to exist is for its normal gravitational behaviour.

 

3. There is no evidence of gravity that repels.

 

4. We already have a very successful theory of gravity, so what does your idea add?

 

 

[Artabasdos]

As we have measured (and make use of) both gravitational time dilation and that due to relative motion, I don't know what you mean by "nominal" or "theoretically". These are both real effects.

 

 

 

1. There are only minute amounts of dark matter around us. The density is probably something like 10^-25 g cm^-3 (in other words, close to a vacuum). So not enough to have any measurable effect.

2. There is no reason why dark matter would behave differently (i.e. negatively) with respect to gravity than ordinary matter. In fact, the only reason it is postulated to exist is for its normal gravitational behaviour.

3. There is no evidence of gravity that repels.

4. We already have a very successful theory of gravity, so what does your idea add?

 

1) Actually, dark matter is theorised to be around 5-6x more common than "normal" matter.

 

2) Again, I'm saying gravity is possibly a product of, not a reactor to, matter & dark matter.

 

3) As above. No where did I state it did. Although one could argue that Einstein's theory of the bending of space time is a form of repellency.

 

4) There are issues with Einstein's theory relating to gravity. For instance, there is supposed to be an equal and opposite reaction for everything, yet concerning gravity there is none. It just is.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Artabasdos

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

moved to speculations.

 

There are multiple errors in your latest post - which you will need to address to support your idea.

 

[Strange]

1) Actually dark matter is theorised to be around 5-6x more common than "normal" matter.

 

 

That is because it is distributed throughout and around galaxies (and between). Whereas normal matter is mainly concentrated in stars and planets. So, the total amount of dark matter is much larger, even though its average density is very low. (The density of dark matter increases towards the centre of the galaxy, so is very low around the solar system.)

 

 

 

2) Again, I'm saying gravity is possibly a product of, not a reactor to, matter & dark matter.

 

Then you need to show how that would work.

 

 

 

3) As above. No where did I state it did. Although one could argue that Einstein's theory of the bending of space time is a form of repellency.

 

You said: "Only in this case anti-matter creates an even force around a body of matter, repelling each other enough to keep the mass of matter in a Constant shape."

 

Also, how is curved space-time "a form of repellency"?

 

 

 

4) There are issues with Einstein's theory relating to gravity. For instance there is supposed to be an equal and opposite reaction for everything, yet concerning gravity there is none. It just is.

 

There is an equal an opposite force. Feel your chair pushing up on you? That is the same force (but in the opposite direction) that you are placing on the chair. If that weren't the case, one or other of you would move.

[Janus]

1) Actually, dark matter is theorised to be around 5-6x more common than "normal" matter.

The fact that in the universe as a whole there is ~5 times as much DM as baryonic matter, does not lead to there being that much more DM in say, the solar system. Even the DM in our galaxies halo is spread out over a large spherical volume that extends well beyond the visible disk of the galaxy. The visible matter is mainly contained in the much smaller volume of the galactic disk. In turn, star systems represent high density area compared to the overall density of the galaxy.(if you took the total mass of the solar system divided into its volume, and compared it to the total mass of the region of space out to 1000 light years from Sol divided into its volume, the density of the solar system would be many many times greater. As a result, the total amount of DM expected to exist within the bounds of the solar system only amount to the equivalent of 1 small asteroid.