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: BradGuth on 27 Sep 2009 11:07 On Sep 27, 7:27 am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 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. Just for the physics what-if sport of it all, exclude the 6.67e-11 N force, and see what happens to the universe, or to a given volume of water. ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 27 Sep 2009 11:19 On Sep 27, 6:49 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > 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 But is it a fall as based entirely upon the 6.67e-11 N.m, or is there some other force of attraction that could take the place of gravity. Perhaps w/o gravity LEOs could become safely accomplished at one km above the surface, because the atmosphere would be that much thinner. In other words, perhaps Earth and LEOs would have to become more atom like. ~ BG
From: Jonah Thomas on 27 Sep 2009 11:43 BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > 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. > > Just for the physics what-if sport of it all, exclude the 6.67e-11 N > force, and see what happens to the universe, or to a given volume of > water. I think if you had a volume of water at STP then nothing much would happen without gravity. it would tend to form sphere. I'm not at all clear how you'd get a volume of water at STP in that case, though. The air tends to drift off, the water tends to evaporate, and you'd need some other way to get them together.
From: BradGuth on 27 Sep 2009 11:47 On Sep 27, 8:43 am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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. > > > Just for the physics what-if sport of it all, exclude the 6.67e-11 N > > force, and see what happens to the universe, or to a given volume of > > water. > > I think if you had a volume of water at STP then nothing much would > happen without gravity. it would tend to form sphere. I agree, but how much of that loose sphere shape holding actually depends upon its own internal gravity, especially if there's no other external forces of gravity to contend with? > > I'm not at all clear how you'd get a volume of water at STP in that > case, though. The air tends to drift off, the water tends to evaporate, > and you'd need some other way to get them together. What actually holds or binds a given molecule of anything together? ~ BG
From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect on 27 Sep 2009 12:43
.... An other molecule! -- Ahmed Ouahi, Architect Best Regards! "BradGuth" <bradguth(a)gmail.com> kirjoitti viestiss�:1c231696-2ea7-4e89-918e-50a84d4928e5(a)h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com... On Sep 27, 8:43 am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Jonah Thomas <jethom...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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. > > > Just for the physics what-if sport of it all, exclude the 6.67e-11 N > > force, and see what happens to the universe, or to a given volume of > > water. > > I think if you had a volume of water at STP then nothing much would > happen without gravity. it would tend to form sphere. I agree, but how much of that loose sphere shape holding actually depends upon its own internal gravity, especially if there's no other external forces of gravity to contend with? > > I'm not at all clear how you'd get a volume of water at STP in that > case, though. The air tends to drift off, the water tends to evaporate, > and you'd need some other way to get them together. What actually holds or binds a given molecule of anything together? ~ BG |