What this Universe would have been if there were no gravity?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: A nomenclature puzzle about gradients, divergences and fields
Next: Newton's law of gravitational attraction
From: Sanny on 26 Sep 2009 14:35 > There would still be solids, fluids and gaseous forms to deal with. > Just the shaps and densities of most everything would become different > w/o gravity. Our precious Air & Water will not remain with us they will fly in vacants space. So how you will get Oxygen & drinking water? Bye Sanny The Computer chats like Humans. Believe it???:http://www.GetClub.com Now you believe it. What do you say?
From: BradGuth on 26 Sep 2009 15:16 On Sep 26, 11:12 am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is gravity more like an axiom or is it more like a theorem? Is it > > > something that gets tacked on separate from everything else > > > important or is it a consequence of something more fundamental? > > > > I don't know the answer to that, so I don't know how the universe > > > would be different without it. > > You mean the undetectable effects that we don't currently understand > > would likely be as unknown and/or misunderstood as they are now. Big > > deal, and thus no great loss. > > No, I mean the unknown connections. > > It's like, say you asked what would be different about the earth if its > orbit around the sun was rectangular instead of elliptical. You could > make a list of what differences that would make. Like, the seasons would > be special at the corners. There might be some dislocations in angular > momentum then, too. But you could figure that the earth wouldn't be > radically different, even if the moon had a rectangular orbit too, the > effects would be kind of subtle. w/o gravity those other much stronger forces might become less moderated or less inhibited, and thereby our orbital factors and those of whatever moon as controlled entirely by those nifty strong forces could become just what the doctor ordered (so to speak). > > But the changes in the laws of physics that would support rectangular > orbits -- are you up to figuring out the implications of that? And do > you think they would be no big deal just because you don't understand > them? > > If gravity is something you can just turn off and nothing else changes, > then you might predict what the result would be. But if turning off > gravity means you have to adjust everything else to get a universe where > fundamental particles still have charge but do not have gravity, then > there's no particular reason to assume those adjustments would be > undetectable. Just unknown. Correct, it's not an easy task to figure out. However, perhaps the mostly fluid human physiology would have evolved as to becoming more jellyfish or conceivably octopus like. Who couldn't use more flexibility, extra arms and/or tentacles. I'd also like to have to bioluminescence and venom. > > If we knew how to do it then we'd know what difference it made. But we > don't. That's exactly what our spendy public funded supercomputers are good for, to run off as many what-if weird simulations as it takes. For example, how the biodiversity is shaped by and/or evolved due to gravity, could be resolved to some extent in a good supercomputer simulation. ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 26 Sep 2009 15:21 On Sep 26, 11:35 am, Sanny <softtank...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > There would still be solids, fluids and gaseous forms to deal with. > > Just the shaps and densities of most everything would become different > > w/o gravity. > > Our precious Air & Water will not remain with us they will fly in > vacants space. So how you will get Oxygen & drinking water? > > Bye > Sanny > > The Computer chats like Humans. > Believe it???:http://www.GetClub.com > Now you believe it. What do you say? The weak force of gravity is not a big insurmountable problem if it were entirely removed, as is the case to some extent while surviving for months on end in LEO. I very much doubt humans would require bones. ~ BG
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Sep 2009 09:49 Sanny wrote: >> w/o gravity there is no such thing as up or down, not that atoms or >> whatever matter of zero gravity would care. >> >> w/o gravity, perhaps solar systems and galaxies would be more like >> large atoms, instead of forming flat disk like. Perhaps everything >> becomes round, spherical or balloon like. > > Without Gravity the Universe would be like Spiders web. > > As Gravity pulls masses and joins them. Without gravity everything > will be like gaseous state. > > Just like Gases has little effect of gravity. They move arround. > Simmilarly every object will fly. > > More like an astronaut in SpaceShip flying. > Huh? Astronauts are falling constantly; I call that gravity. What do you call it? /BAH
From: Jonah Thomas on 27 Sep 2009 10:27
jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > BradGuth wrote: > > jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > >> Based on what you wrote here, you seem to think that matter was > >> made and then gravity was added. Do you know what space-time > >> is? > >> > > w/o gravity atoms would still be atoms. Obviously you got a problem > > with that. > > Gravity is what you measure when there are lots of atoms in an > volume. Why do you think there wouldn't be any gravity to measure > if all existing atoms are equally disbursed throughout space? > You may not be able to discern its existence but outside the > space-time one should be able to measure the constant. He's asking what kind of universe we'd have if the gravitational constant was zero. I think he wants to assume that this could be changed without changing any fundamental laws, just make this one change. I don't know whether that could be done since I don't have any idea how to change the gravitational constant at all. |