Doesn't It just make sense for gravity to be the fourth dimension? Every thing seems to make sense with it that way

[grahas]

Why can't gravity be the fourth dimension? No one says it is so I assume that it is already been dis proven, but really, with the theoretical Graviton particle allowing atoms to be effected by the gravitational dimension, dosn't every thing seem to fall in to place? It seems to make sense with my limited high school knowledge, + youtube videos. Couldn't the part of an atom that weighs it down be the graviton, allowing the particle to interact with the gravitational dimension, then the protons and neutrons allow the atom to interact with the physical, 3d space dimension, then other particles of the atom would allow the it to interact with other dimensions. So if one could snap "magic physics fingers", and remove all the theoretical gravitons from a rock, and shove them in to one group, wouldn't you have a weight less rock? And if you got enough gravitons, a black hole?

 

 

 

 

[andrewcellini]

Why can't gravity be the fourth dimension?

with what you've described, i'm not sure how you're using the word dimension.

[Sensei]

Why can't gravity be the fourth dimension?

Answer questions:

- what is length of vector in 2D?

- what is length of vector in 3D? (Both you should know from primary school)

- what would be length of vector in 4D (or any other dimension) ?

 

How would you modify f.e. inverse-square law to work with 4D spatial dimensions?

[ajb]

No one says it is so I assume that it is already been dis proven,

It is 'not even wrong'. There is nothing to disprove. Gravity, or any other force cannot simply be another dimension. I don't understand why anyone would think so.

 

...but really, with the theoretical Graviton particle allowing atoms to be effected by the gravitational dimension, dosn't every thing seem to fall in to place?

I think you are not using 'dimension' in the standard accepted way.

 

Today gravitons are totally hypothetical, but can be discussed in quantum general relativity to tree level or one-loop. That is we can use low order Feynman diagrams in this description and understand quantum gravity as an effective theory, that is not the full quantum theory of gravity. The standard theory is 4 dimensional (3+1). Gravity and gravitons do not 'give an extra dimension' to space-time or anything like that.

 

It seems to make sense with my limited high school knowledge, + youtube videos.

This maybe the problem.

 

Physics is hard and takes a lot of effort. You will need a lot more than high school and youtube to start to understand the basics of gravitational physics. I suggest that, if you are really interested you invest in some proper reading.

 

Couldn't the part of an atom that weighs it down be the graviton, allowing the particle to interact with the gravitational dimension, then the protons and neutrons allow the atom to interact with the physical, 3d space dimension, then other particles of the atom would allow the it to interact with other dimensions. So if one could snap "magic physics fingers", and remove all the theoretical gravitons from a rock, and shove them in to one group, wouldn't you have a weight less rock? And if you got enough gravitons, a black hole?

No idea what you are talking about. See above.

Edited April 10, 2015 by ajb

[michel123456]

The fourth dimension is considered to be Time.

It is 'not even wrong'. There is nothing to disprove. Gravity, or any other force cannot simply be another dimension. I don't understand why anyone would think so.

One should first establish a direct and indestructible link between Time and Gravity. I suppose that is not difficult for you, AJB

[Strange]

The fourth dimension is considered to be Time.

One should first establish a direct and indestructible link between Time and Gravity. I suppose that is not difficult for you, AJB

 

Gravity is the curvature of space-time (there is your link).

[ajb]

Gravity is the curvature of space-time (there is your link).

Exactly.

 

There is also the notion of proper time of an observer which can be used to parametrise his geodesic.

 

Anyway, gravity and time are deeply linked, but gravity is not 'just time' as another dimension.

[michel123456]

Yes.

Time decreases (or increases, it depends how you measure it) as a direct function of distance: an object seen from a distance is seen in the past in direct proportion to distance.

While gravity decreases in function of the distance squared.

So they cannot be the same thing.

----------------

But if one multiplies length by time, maybe he gets closer to the same thing. (or have I mixed up the units??)

Edited April 10, 2015 by michel123456