11–20 of 90 posts
This is really interesting. Perhaps there is also a chance that electromagnetic fields are indeed entirely responsible for gravity, in some complicated yet unknown manner.
Photons, for instance, cannot interact directly with each other via the electromagnetic field. Gluons do self-interact via the strong interaction. But both photons and gluons interact with all types of particles via gravity (although sometimes this interaction is so small that we would never be able to measure it).
This is really interesting. Perhaps there is also a chance that electromagnetic fields are indeed entirely responsible for gravity, in some complicated yet unknown manner.
The important thing to remember is it's called the stress-energy tensor for a reason, it's not just mass distribution that causes curvature. Thought experiment: which will curve spacetime more, a 1kg box of gas at 1K or the same box after the gas inside is raised to 293K?
I find gravity interesting, because everything that exists interacts with everything via the gravitational field. This is not the case with any other sort of interaction; gravity is truly different. See this diagram showing the ways that different particles can interact in the Standard Model: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/El... Photons, for instance, cannot interact directly with each othe…
This is really interesting. Perhaps there is also a chance that electromagnetic fields are indeed entirely responsible for gravity, in some complicated yet unknown manner.
What would that mean? As far as we know there is gravity in the absence of EM fields and EM energy produce gravitational effects just like other forms of energy (and in the realm of direct human experience the contribution of EM is negligible).
The article explores the idea that pure kinetic energy in form of photons indeed might have at least gravity-like properties.
My presumption is that atoms are somehow made of really high energy EM fields so that they appear to be massive. Consequently, atoms having mass or photons having inertia are responsible for gravitation, and that could mean that EM fields are the cause of gravity entirely. The problem with that presumption is that perhaps there is no way to check.
The important thing to remember is it's called the stress-energy tensor for a reason, it's not just mass distribution that causes curvature. Thought experiment: which will curve spacetime more, a 1kg box of gas at 1K or the same box after the gas inside is raised to 293K?
The warm box will of course »heavier« because it contains additional energy. Fundamentally there is no mass, it is just a convenient way to talk about the energy hidden in the structure of matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would that mean? As far as we know there is gravity in the absence of EM fields and EM energy produce gravitational effects just like other forms of energy (and in the realm of direct human experience the contribution of EM is negligible).
"there is gravity in the absence of EM fields" That just cannot be true. EM fields are just about everywhere. They permeate space almost as universally as gravity, but in form of photons (to name higher energy EM fields here) or other low energy waves. Gravity accumulates with great masses, mass is also energy (in rest). The article explores the idea that pure kinetic energy in form of photons indeed might have at le…
Fields are mathematical tools, they are not - without wanting to go down the philosophical rabbit hole - real things out there in the universe.
And the thing about everything just being electromagnetic fields is nonsense, physicists understand physics way better than you do. Sorry to sound condescending, but the internet already has enough obviously wrong ideas by random people without a clue what they are talking but.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would that mean? As far as we know there is gravity in the absence of EM fields and EM energy produce gravitational effects just like other forms of energy (and in the realm of direct human experience the contribution of EM is negligible).
"there is gravity in the absence of EM fields" That just cannot be true. EM fields are just about everywhere. They permeate space almost as universally as gravity, but in form of photons (to name higher energy EM fields here) or other low energy waves. Gravity accumulates with great masses, mass is also energy (in rest). The article explores the idea that pure kinetic energy in form of photons indeed might have at le…
Isn't dark matter most likely some kind of material that has mass, but no EM interaction?
We also know that there are interactions inside atoms (the strong and weak forces) that have no known relation to electro-magnetism, so I'm not sure what you are getting at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"there is gravity in the absence of EM fields" That just cannot be true. EM fields are just about everywhere. They permeate space almost as universally as gravity, but in form of photons (to name higher energy EM fields here) or other low energy waves. Gravity accumulates with great masses, mass is also energy (in rest). The article explores the idea that pure kinetic energy in form of photons indeed might have at le…
EM fields are just about everywhere. Fields are mathematical tools, they are not - without wanting to go down the philosophical rabbit hole - real things out there in the universe. And the thing about everything just being electromagnetic fields is nonsense, physicists understand physics way better than you do. Sorry to sound condescending, but the internet already has enough obviously wrong ideas by random people wi…
