seeking a common denominator

[YT2095]

I`m sure many have also wonder about this.

 

electron flow creates a magnetic feild.

magnetic feilds resemble gravity.

gravity can effect light.

magnets can effect electron flow/paths.

electrons can be made to emit light.

light can be made to emit electrons.

 

so it all seems to be a sort of incomplete corellation. as in can electrons be made to effect gravity, can light make a gravitational pull or infact make magnetism?

 

is there a common denominator between these feilds at all?

I`ts been bugging the hell out of me since I was a kid, and nothing I`ve read on here come close to an answer (or at least one I can make sense of LOL).

 

IS there a common factor at all even? it just seems odd that so many seem to tie quite well together but some of the other stuff doesn`t?

[Guest Camaroofdeth]

Anything with mass has a gravitational field, so in theory, electrons should, and in fact do, affect gravity. Albeit on a wicked small scale.

 

I think that you're wrong to try and draw a common denominator between magnetics and gravity, however. Gravity does not exhibit the physical "pulling" on objects that magnetism causes. A good way to illustrate the difference would be to imagine the sun just spontaneously flashing out of existance. If gravity was attracting the planets in a way resembling magnetism, then there would be a delay between the disappearance of the sun and the effect of the loss of gravity on the earth. However, gravity doesn't really pull, it's attractions are caused by paths following distortions in space time, so the effect on our planet would be immediate.

So I don't think photons could ever really effect gravity, as they are massless and therefore wouldn't cause any distortions in space time.

 

I'm not sure about light having an effect on magnetism. . .

[agaubr]

Your illustration is flawed. If speed of light is the limit to speed and nothing goes faster than light, then loss of gravity should take eight minutes to reach earth. Even with a time space distortion due to gravity or lack off the effect is not immediate unless the gravitron moves at greater than speed of light. Some results from string theory ( beyond my experise ) does indicate that gravitorns have some unique possibilities of moving between the 12 dimensions needed for a proposed unifed field equation and this propety may lead to the speed being greater than light. Time will tell about this tneory.

 

Ag

[JaKiri]

YT2095 said in post # :

Light doesn't emit electrons.

 

Magnetism isn't very similar to gravity at all, apart from it's a force.

 

What you're basically saying is 'Hey! Forces cause force!'

[YT2095]

I said light can be MADE TO emit electrons. and I think magnetism is quite similar with respect to it`s power of attraction.

I`m sure they may be tenuos links, and it`s just a "Gut feeling" that they all have something in common. I just can`t place it is all

 

if light has Photons and gravity has gravitons, what do magnets have? (magnetons maybe?).

[JaKiri]

YT2095 said in post # :

I said light can be MADE TO emit electrons.

 

No it can't. Light can make other things emit electrons (the photoelectric effect), but that's like saying that I emit cd's because I can take them out of their boxes.

 

YT2095 said in post # :

if light has Photons and gravity has gravitons, what do magnets have? (magnetons maybe?).

 

Magnetism has photons. Light is an upshot of the Electromagnetic force.

[YT2095]

MrL_JaKiri said in post # :

Magnetism has photons. Light is an upshot of the Electromagnetic force.

 

so magnetic flux is photon based?

I kinda figured that was the case, whereas if these photons are made to oscillate at high enough frequency, they become or can become visible light, yay/nay?

[Guest Camaroofdeth]

Visible light is the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that our eyes can detect, which is all frequency based, so. . . I guess that's a yes, though I'm not sure if that's really the best way to look at it.

 

As far as the gravity thing is concerned; the effect would be immediate. This was one of the relevations that caused Einstein to doubt Newtonian gravity in the first place. Or I should say, I believe so. I'll look it up (it's in a book around here somewhere) and find out if I'm right or if I'm just an ass. But gravity really shouldn't be thought of as caused by something physical (which would cause the delay), but rather as a distortion in space time (which would cause no delay). Your fault seems to come in thinking that the distortion in space time is caused by gravity, when it is in fact the opposite.

[alt_f13]

I'm pretty sure there would be a delay, as well as a large spacetime wave. Newtonian gravity predicted an immediate change, whereas Einstein's model did not.

[JaKiri]

Gravity, in GR and in QM where it's predicted by the graviton, are both limited by c.

[alt_f13]

Damn rights. Thanks for clarifying.

 

About that wave caused by the sudden loss of gravitational pull.

 

I would assume there would be a peak and trough, where gravity is at its maximum, and some sort of antigravitational force.

 

What do you think?

 

Hmm.. negative gravity...

[JaKiri]

No.

[YT2095]

so if magnetic flux is photon based, and when made to vibrate at sufficient speed will emit light or radio (oscilating photons).

then a stationary magnet would be like a DC source of photons.

photons that are "flat line" as opposed to the AC type that have a wavelength.

 

(I use the terms AC and DC as an analogy only!)

[lakmilis]

A little out of date, but Let me make some corrections.

 

Jakiri, photons can indeed 'emit' electrons...or be made to as initial poster stated.

 

The photon is an antiparticle of itself and in 'total annhilation' of two photons , an electron and positron is emitted, thus correctly saying they can be 'made to' to emit electrons (however the emission of one leaves no remainder of the photon(s).

 

Now, with respect to gravitons, they are being looked into , however no effects yet have been observed to verify their existense, thus please refrain from stating some 'reality' as if they do. Sure...it is still very nice to question if gravity immediately would disappear of would propagate.

 

And for the record, another person who said, it does not propagate, effects woulod vanish immediately due to gravity being curvature of space fabric...A question arises...the 'de-curving' of space might take some time too. The greater the mass, the greater the distortion...A sudden disappearance of the sun might take space-time some period to uncurve again right?

 

who knows, would this uncurving take 8 minutes?

 

Now having said that, what do I personally think about gravity propagation?

 

I think on a macro level, one would have instant effects yes... however, removing mass on a sufficient scale immediately brings in a whole lot of other concepts, zero point energy, macro-tunnelling (which statistically just aint feasible), perhaps even casimir effects, etc...a different ballgame altogether... it is futile to make such a discussion without understanding underlying concepts further... So one goes back to subatomic particles, talking about removing mass and seeing the effects of gravity fields...which is exactly why in QM gravitons DO have a proposal value.

 

Last thing...delays in curvature (if mass is removed de curving of space cant happen faster than c, right? , rather try and explain to yourself...what is inertia really? what 'intrinsic' property of space-time gives rise to the explanation of inertia as opposed to its description.

 

Enjoy