Memes

45548 readers

1895 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Heh (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If there's anyone who can, please let me know if the similarities between these two formulas imply a relationship between gravity and electrical attraction or hint at a unified theory, or if it's just a coincidence or a consequence of something else.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

There is one thing particularly interesting, and that is that the inverse square laws appears again. It appears in the electrical laws for instance.

That is electricity also exerts forces inverse to the square of distance with charges. One thinks perhaps inverse square distance has some deep significance, maybe gravity and electricity are different aspects of the same thing

...

Today our theory of physics, laws of physics are a multitude of different parts and pieces that don't fit together very well. We don't understand the one in terms of the other. We don't have one structure that it's all deduced we have several pieces that don't quite fit yet.

And that's the reason in these lectures instead of telling you what the law of physics is I talk about the things that's common in the various laws because we don't understand the connection between them.

But what's very strange is that there is certain things that's the same in both

Richard Feynman and 45:48 https://youtu.be/-kFOXP026eE?si=hAIvDhWVGxMOvEi1

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Electromagnetism and gravity are both mediated by massless bosons; photons and gravitons respectively. This is why both forces follow the inverse square law.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think there's any evidence for gravitons yet, and gravity hasn't been quantized. I'd say it's this similarity that's the best argument of quantum gravity, not the other way around.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair. The masslessness of the bosons that should mediate gravity, along with them being spin-2, can however be deduced from the properties of gravitational waves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We know that gravity is a wave that travels at the speed of light, this has been experimentally measured many times. If it is also quantized (a very reasonable ~~symptom~~ hypothesis since everything else that we've ever seen is) then by definition there are particles that carry gravity.

If gravity is continuous then we would end up with something like the ultraviolet catastrophe but for gravity.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hmm, I hadn't considered an "ultragravity catastrophe". I wonder if this could accout for dark energy or the supposed inflatons? Probably not, the catastrophe suggests infinite energy, not just lots of energy, eh?

The ultraviolet catastrophe was averted due to the discreet nature of electrons though, and I don't recall gravity behaving as a blackbody radiator anyway. Would this come into effect at horizons?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sorry, I think I came off as too confident in my previous comment. I'm quite sure about my first paragraph but the rest is just speculation from an amateur.

If I would risk speculating even further though, there's some similarity in the sense that infinities indicate a problem. In the ultraviolet catastrophe the infinity arises from the energy of arbitrarily short EM wavelengths. With gravity it arises in the density of black holes. It seems unreasonable that it would actually be infinite, and it's possible that quantization of gravity plays a part in preventing that from happening.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The relation between them is that they're both forces that scale with the inverse square of the distance between the objects. Any force that scales with the inverse square of distance has pretty much the same general form.

Another similarity is that both are incomplete, first approximations that describe their respective forces. The more complete versions are Maxwell's laws for electromagnetism and General Relativity for gravity.