Does gravity have mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim_Baur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Richca said:
Linus makes an excellent point here. I’d like to add a couple of other thoughts in response to Inocente. Firstly, where in the universe do these laws of nature exist? As far as I know, there is not a single existent thing that we call “the laws of nature.” The physical laws of nature which presumably some scientists talk about such as physicists are derived from actual existent things such as elemental atoms and the forces exerted by these atoms, plants, animals, etc. It is quite obvious that if we talk at all about the laws of nature, this can only refer to individual things having natures. For example, the speed of light is supposedly constant and its probably called a law of nature. But this law of the speed of light has no seperate existence from light itself. It is of the nature of light that its speed is constant.

The laws of nature do not produce anything as if those laws have some seperate existence from which the laws are derived. What produces things are other things such as man begets man and an oak tree produces another oak tree and stars produce light.

Our very idea of law has no existence outside the human intellect in the external world but because we can observe that things act always or nearly always in the same way, especially irrrational creatures, we say that this orderly way of acting is like a law to these things which you correctly ascribe to God who made these things. Properly speaking though, as St Thomas Aquinas says , law is something pertaining to reason and a rule and measure of acts. Consequently, irrational creatures, devoid of reason, are not properly said to partake of the Eternal Law except by similitude.
Click to expand...
I agree with most of this, including that the laws of nature are not existent things in themselves, with two provisos:
  • Philosophy of science uses the terrm “Laws of Nature” in a way that is different from Aquinas’s definition of “law” and so your objection to its use in this context is misdirected. Within the philosophy of science there is a vigorous and ongoing debate as to whether these laws are descriptive (ie human constructs which describe what we observe - in other words we invent descriptions of Nature) or proscriptive (ie universally true “rules” for how Nature is and behaves that we discover, sometimes imperfectly, over time). But in any case “laws of nature” applies to classes of thing not to individual things.
  • The natures of individual things, a carbon atom, a lion, a tree, a chunk of sandstone are not fundamental but proceed from their constituents according to the laws of nature. So if you understand the laws you get an explanation for the nature of the thing. It is this understanding that the fundamentals are deeper than individual things and that the nature of individual things can be explained (rather than just being what it is) that makes science a better source of insight into and understanding of the workings of nature (using the word in its broad modern sense) than scholastic metaphysics.
It seems to me that a lot of the time neo-scholastics and scientists talk past one another because their jargons use the same words with different meanings; and they each insist on their own meaning.
 
If we don’t know the essence of the natural laws.

If math is construct of our ability to reason.

If math, therefore, has mental ontological existence and not substantial existence.

Then it would follow that the laws of nature are descriptive.

Is that correct?
 
hecd2 said:
I agree with most of this, including that the laws of nature are not existent things in themselves, with two provisos:
  • Philosophy of science uses the terrm “Laws of Nature” in a way that is different from Aquinas’s definition of “law” and so your objection to its use in this context is misdirected. Within the philosophy of science there is a vigorous and ongoing debate as to whether these laws are descriptive (ie human constructs which describe what we observe - in other words we invent descriptions of Nature) or proscriptive (ie universally true “rules” for how Nature is and behaves that we discover, sometimes imperfectly, over time). But in any case “laws of nature” applies to classes of thing not to individual things.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
hecd2 said:
Einstein proposed that gravitational effects are caused by spacetime curvature because he needed a theory in which accceleration and gravitation are unified, and the specific theory he came up with fits experimental results exactly. In a way that flat space and Newtonian theory does not.
Click to expand...
I’m a really busy person that doesn’t have the time to chitty chat on the Internet. However you did mention Einstein which made me reflect on the following article I read back on April 18th of this year.

In Kavli Foundation’s Spolight Live: Secrets of the Universe’s First Light (Transcript), Walter Ogburn stated, “One of the things that really excites me the most is just looking at the BICEP2 map and seeing that each of the spots is an imprint of a quantum fluctuation that existed as inflation was happening. This is something that we’ve been looking for a hint of for decades. Even back in Einstein’s lifetime, he was trying to find ways to put general relativity together with the other forces and combine them into one theory of everything. People have come up with string theory and with many other ideas for how you go about that. Maybe this is the first evidence for which of those ideas can be right which ones could be wrong. Every time I look at that map, that’s what I’m thinking about. Every spot is quantum gravity.”
kavlifoundation.org/science-spotlights/secrets-universe%E2%80%99s-first-light-transcript

http://www.kavlifoundation.org/sites/default/files/image/astrophysics/b_over_b_rect_BICEP2.png
 
LogisticsBranch said:
In Kavli Foundation’s Spolight Live: Secrets of the Universe’s First Light (Transcript), Walter Ogburn stated, “One of the things that really excites me the most is just looking at the BICEP2 map and seeing that each of the spots is an imprint of a quantum fluctuation that existed as inflation was happening. This is something that we’ve been looking for a hint of for decades. Even back in Einstein’s lifetime, he was trying to find ways to put general relativity together with the other forces and combine them into one theory of everything. People have come up with string theory and with many other ideas for how you go about that. Maybe this is the first evidence for which of those ideas can be right which ones could be wrong. Every time I look at that map, that’s what I’m thinking about. Every spot is quantum gravity.”
Click to expand...
Except the Bicep2 guys now agree that their entire vector mode signal could be caused by interstellar dust so that breathless quote is moot.

You’ve bust the margins of the page with that big picture.
 
hecd2 said:
Except the Bicep2 guys now agree that their entire vector mode signal could be caused by interstellar dust so that breathless quote is moot.

You’ve bust the margins of the page with that big picture.
Click to expand...
Yep. Sorry about the margins. Well, I haven’t kept up on this so thanks. 🙂 I just read
what Paul Steinhardt wrote in Nature, volume:510, Pages:9, published, Date published:
(05 June 2014) regarding our discussion. Here is an excerpt:

". . .]The BICEP2 instrument detects radiation at only one frequency,
so cannot distinguish the cosmic contribution from other sources.
To do so, the BICEP2 team used measurements of galactic dust collected
by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and Planck satellites, each
of which operates over a range of other frequencies. When the BICEP2 team
did its analysis, the Planck dust map had not yet been published, so the
team extracted data from a preliminary map that had been presented several
months earlier. Now a careful reanalysis by scientists at Princeton University
and the Institute for Advanced Study, also in Princeton, has concluded that
the BICEP2 B-mode pattern could be the result mostly or entirely of foreground
effects without any contribution from gravitational waves. Other dust models
considered by the BICEP2 team do not change this negative conclusion, the Princetonteam showed . . .]

nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346
 
hecd2 said:
Except the Bicep2 guys now agree
that their entire vector mode signal could be caused by interstellar
dust so that breathless quote is moot.
Click to expand...
I want to continue this discussion a little bit further with you.
In the forum World News on this website you stated, “His[Trent Horn]
most egregious error is to claim that this experiment detects ‘gravity’
waves. It does no such thing. It detects gravitational waves.
Gravity waves are entirely different things and have nothing to do with
this discovery.”

Perhaps you should update what you have stated above with the lastest
information that is provided by the articles in Nature.🙂

Now relating to this topic: “Does gravity have mass?”

I did notice an article in Kavli Foundation News:
02/19/2013 - A Simple View Of Gravity Does Not Fully Explain
The Distribution Of Stars In Crowded Clusters
February 20, 2013

Gravity remains the dominant force on large astronomical scales,
but when it comes to stars in young star clusters the dynamics
in these crowded environments cannot be simply explained by the
pull of gravity.

After analyzing Hubble Space Telescope images of star cluster
NGC 1818 in the Large Magellanic Cloud, a satellite galaxy of the
Milky Way, researchers at the Kavli Institute for Astronomy and
Astrophysics (KIAA) at Peking University in Beijing found more
binary star systems toward the periphery of cluster than in the
center – the opposite of what they expected. The surprising
distribution of binaries is thought to result from complex
interactions among stars within young clusters. . .

kavlifoundation.org/kavli-news/KIAA-simple-view-gravity-crowded-clusters

Fasinating times we live in! 😃 I’m a science nerd!😃
 
Well, hecd2 aka Alec MacAndrew aka Alec Mac getting back
to your comment regarding gravitational waves!😃 I thought I
would post this to this topic because it does discuss the
gravitational field.

My father had a great collection of books and magazines which
he left me when he died. He also met Einstein. I just read his
Scientific American magazine, VOL. 182, NO. 4 from APRIL 1950:
On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation,
An account of the newly published extension of the general theory
of relativity against its historical and philosophical background
by Albert Einstein.

Anyone who is interested in reading the article by Albert Einstein
in its entirety can do so online thanks to MIT! 👍

http://web.mit.edu/jwk/www/docs/Einstein-1950-Generalized-Theory-of-Relativity_Sci-Am.pdf

I’m so thrilled and excited to have the opportunity to share this
:extrahappy:with everyone!
Thank you.
 
Gravity is defined as the change in speed of a falling object. It is measured in meters per second per second. On earth, a falling rock dropped from a tower will gather speed at the rate 32 feet per second per second.

Mass is defined as the amount of energy needed to stop a moving object at a certain speed.

An object has mass no matter where it is measured — on the moon or on earth. Gravity is stronger on earth than on the moon, but mass is the same in both places for a given object.
 
Magnet, your comment isn’t completely correct. NASA’s article, “What is gravity really?”
should be of help to you:

*Because of gravity, if you drop something, it falls down, instead of up. Well, everybody knows that! But, what does this really mean? What is gravity?

Gravity has played a big part in making the universe the way it is. Gravity is what makes pieces of matter clump together into planets, moons, and stars. Gravity is what makes the planets orbit the stars–like Earth orbits our star, the Sun. Gravity is what makes the stars clump together in huge, swirling galaxies

A great scientist, Albert Einstein, who lived in the 20th century, had a new idea about gravity. He thought that gravity is what happens when space itself is curved or warped around a mass, such as a star or a planet. Thus, a star or planet would cause kind of a dip in space so that any other object that came too near would tend to fall into the dip.

But now NASA has a special program, called Fundamental Physics . . . for seeking answers to these and other mysteries of the universe. Fundamental Physics hopes to do two things:

◦To discover and explore fundamental physical laws governing matter, space, and time.

◦To discover and understand the basic rules nature uses to build the complex and beautiful structures we see around us.

Over the years, scientists and engineers have developed new technologies and instruments that will help us understand nature. Now we can take these new instruments into space and do experiments where the forces of gravity are very, very small (like when the Space Shuttle or the International Space Station are orbiting Earth in “free fall”). This way, scientists can do very delicate experiments to see what single atoms do under special conditions.

NASA hopes these experiments will help us understand our universe and ourselves. NASA also hopes the experiments will help develop technologies that will benefit people in their everyday lives.*
http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/what-is-gravity/en/

The previous page that hecd2 and I have been presenting has to due with NASA’s special program which entails Albert Einstein. I suggest people should read the following page. Thanks
 
LogisticsBranch said:
Magnet, your comment isn’t completely correct. NASA’s article, “What is gravity really?”
should be of help to you:

*Because of gravity, if you drop something, it falls down, instead of up. Well, everybody knows that! But, what does this really mean? What is gravity? *

I stated a principle I learned in my college physics classes. It is completely correct. Do you love to poke holes in other people’s statements instead of giving credence to them and then building upon them?

Your words describe the manifestations of gravity in the universe. They do not lend any more knowledge to what is gravity other than its dependence on mass. Gravity is a force, mass is not. Mass is measured by the amount of energy needed to move an object from a state of inertia to one of movement at a certain rate of acceleration.

Have you contributed anything to further understanding of the nature of mass? Since mass is the same everywhere, on large planets and on small, it is a universal phenomenon that has nothing to do with gravity.
Click to expand...
 
Dear magnet:D

I earlier provided you a document from the The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) which is an American government agency used by educators and students.

The following information is from The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility managed by Jefferson Science Associates, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy that should be of help to you and other viewers.

Gravity
GRAVITY DEFINED
Gravity is the tendency of objects with mass to accelerate towards each other
Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces (interactions) in nature.

Gravity and our Solar System
The Sun’s gravity is what holds our solar system together.

Planets and Gravity
•Since Jupiter is the largest planet, it has the most gravity.
•Pluto has the least amount of gravity of all the planets

UNIVERSAL LAW OF GRAVITATION:
•Pluto has the least amount of gravity of all the planets
•Gravity is greater when mass is larger and distance is shorter.

MICROGRAVITY:
•The further an object is away from another object, the force of gravity is weaker.
•The further an object moves from the surface of the Earth, the less gravity it feels from the Earth.
•Scientists on the Space Shuttle experience microgravity

Mass and Weight are two different Properties of Matter:
•Mass is a physical property of matter that explains how much matter is in an object
•Mass does not change when gravity changes

WEIGHT
•Weight is a force which is calculated by multiplying the acceleration of gravity times mass.
•Weight can change when gravity changes
•An elephant on the Earth would weigh less on the Moon, because gravity is less on the moon.
•An elephant’s mass would not change if he went to the moon

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share this with you.😃 I’ve been extremely busy so better late then never.
 
Logistics Branch: Thank you for your illustrations of gravity and mass. We now have a better understanding.
 
Gravity is the action of God or one of his angels moving the universe according to his Divine Plan ;). Curved space and curved time are the products of an overworked imagination. 😃

Linus2nd
 
Linusthe2nd said:
Gravity is the action of God or one of his angels moving the universe according to his Divine Plan ;). Curved space and curved time are the products of an overworked imagination. 😃

Linus2nd
Click to expand...
Your irrational excitement is obviously devoid of science and technological developments that have been mentioned on this topic by other individuals including myself, thus your comment is absolutely ridiculous and lacks evidence.

Your first sentence implies that God or one of his angels is using gravity. Gravity waves are present in many disasters such as a hurricane and a tsunamis which kill people and destroy property. Also, climate change is real!

Your second sentence is also another flat out lie! WMAP Team Receives the 2012 Gruber Cosmology Prize. It notes that on that page from NASA:

4 …nailed down the curvature of space to within 0.4% of “flat” Euclidean. map.gsfc.nasa.gov/
 
LogisticsBranch said:
Well, hecd2 aka
Alec MacAndrew aka Alec Mac getting back to your
comment regarding gravitational waves!😃 I thought I
would post this to this topic because it does discuss the
gravitational field.

My father had a great collection of books and magazines which
he left me when he died. He also met Einstein. I just read his
Scientific American magazine, VOL. 182, NO. 4 from APRIL 1950:
On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation,
An account of the newly published extension of the general theory
of relativity against its historical and philosophical background
by Albert Einstein.

Anyone who is interested in reading the article by Albert Einstein
in its entirety can do so online thanks to MIT! 👍

http://web.mit.edu/jwk/www/docs/Einstein-1950-Generalized-Theory-of-Relativity_Sci-Am.pdf

I’m so thrilled and excited to have the opportunity to share this
:extrahappy:with everyone!
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Ahh, UPDATE!😃

Gravitational Waves Detected 100 Years After Einstein’s Prediction
News Release • February 11, 2016

LIGO Opens New Window on the Universe with Observation of Gravitational
Waves from Colliding Black Holes

WASHINGTON, DC/Cascina, Italy

For the first time, scientists have observed ripples in the fabric of spacetime
called gravitational waves, arriving at the earth from a cataclysmic event in
the distant universe. This confirms a major prediction of Albert Einstein’s
1915 general theory of relativity and opens an unprecedented new window
onto the cosmos.

Gravitational waves carry information about their dramatic origins and about
the nature of gravity that cannot otherwise be obtained. Physicists have
concluded that the detected gravitational waves were produced during the
final fraction of a second of the merger of two black holes to produce a single,
more massive spinning black hole. This collision of two black holes had been
predicted but never observed.

The gravitational waves were detected on September 14, 2015 at 5:51 a.m.
Eastern Daylight Time (09:51 UTC) by both of the twin Laser Interferometer
Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) detectors, located in Livingston,
Louisiana, and Hanford, Washington, USA. The LIGO Observatories are
funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), and were conceived,
built, and are operated by Caltech and MIT. The discovery, accepted for
publication in the journal Physical Review Letters, was made by the LIGO
Scientific Collaboration (which includes the GEO Collaboration and the
Australian Consortium for Interferometric Gravitational Astronomy) and the
Virgo Collaboration using data from the two LIGO detectors.

Based on the observed signals, LIGO scientists estimate that the black
holes for this event were about 29 and 36 times the mass of the sun, and
the event took place 1.3 billion years ago. About 3 times the mass of the
sun was converted into gravitational waves in a fraction of a second—with
a peak power output about 50 times that of the whole visible universe. By
looking at the time of arrival of the signals—the detector in Livingston
recorded the event 7 milliseconds before the detector in Hanford—scientists
can say that the source was located in the Southern Hemisphere.

According to general relativity, a pair of black holes orbiting around each
other lose energy through the emission of gravitational waves, causing them
to gradually approach each other over billions of years, and then much more
quickly in the final minutes. During the final fraction of a second, the two black
holes collide into each other at nearly one-half the speed of light and form a
single more massive black hole, converting a portion of the combined black
holes’ mass to energy, according to Einstein’s formula E=mc2. This energy
is emitted as a final strong burst of gravitational waves. It is these gravitational
waves that LIGO has observed.

The existence of gravitational waves was first demonstrated in the 1970s and
80s by Joseph Taylor, Jr., and colleagues. Taylor and Russell Hulse
discovered in 1974 a binary system composed of a pulsar in orbit around a
neutron star. Taylor and Joel M. Weisberg in 1982 found that the orbit of the
pulsar was slowly shrinking over time because of the release of energy in
the form of gravitational waves. For discovering the pulsar and showing that it
would make possible this particular gravitational wave measurement, Hulse
and Taylor were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993.

The new LIGO discovery is the first observation of gravitational waves
themselves, made by measuring the tiny disturbances the waves make to
space and time as they pass through the earth.

“Our observation of gravitational waves accomplishes an ambitious goal set
out over 5 decades ago to directly detect this elusive phenomenon and better
understand the universe, and, fittingly, fulfills Einstein’s legacy on the
100th anniversary of his general theory of relativity,” says
Caltech’s David H. Reitze, executive director of the LIGO Laboratory.
. . .]
ligo.caltech.edu/news/ligo20160211
ligo.caltech.edu/detection
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top