General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#3 |
|
Gravitons haven't been detected yet. Physicists are much more divided about their existence than on the existence of the Higgs (which pretty much everyone would bet on as a sure thing).
I have a strong doubt that the LHC will be able to tell us. Also, we don't expect any results from the LHC for another 2ish years. And that will be early preliminary results. To note, my experiment ran early in 2006 and we just started getting preliminary results last year (and it is a lot less complicated than the LHC experiments). JM |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
Einstien differed with Newton in that Newton thought that if the sun were to just pop out of existance the planets would immediatly fly off. In other words gravity is instantaious. Einstien believed that since nothing can move faster than light gravity must move slower and so therefore it would take at least 8 minutes before the earth lost its orbit.
I'm with Newton on this btw. My very first announcement on this ever, and y o u... w e r e... t h e r e. I consider gravity to be an extra dimentional intrusion into our universe. That extra dimention isn't subject to time. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
Originally posted by Lancer
Einstien differed with Newton in that Newton thought that if the sun were to just pop out of existance the planets would immediatly fly off. In other words gravity is instantaious. Einstien believed that since nothing can move faster than light gravity must move slower and so therefore it would take at least 8 minutes before the earth lost its orbit. I'm with Newton on this btw. My very first announcement on this ever, and y o u... w e r e... t h e r e. I consider gravity to be an extra dimentional intrusion into our universe. That extra dimention isn't subject to time. omg u wit ur librul syuns y dont u go to frans! |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
Actually, on a galactic scale, gravity is very strong because the other forces don't propagate well over long distances. That's why galaxies and stars and the like are able to form. On the smaller scale, the strong nuclear force and electromagnetism are much more relevant (and powerful). No gravity and Electromagnetism have the same inverse square law drop off in force with distance. Electromagnetic force is millions of times stronger then gravity (for example a refrigerator magnet can exert more force on a paper clip then the gravity of the entire planet). Gravity has really only one thing going for it though, it always attracts so large masses exert huge fields, ware as most charged particles are mixed in such a way (atoms or opposing fields) as to render electromagnetism irrelevant on galactic scales (at least thats what we think). The nuclear forces are indeed very different and act over very short distances and in very counter intuitive ways (like getting stronger with distance instead of weaker).
Given that I don't see why Gravity must be explained by multidimensional weirdness if Electromagnetism doesn't need it? Or do we even understand that fully either? I doubt it. |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
Given that I don't see why Gravity must be explained by multidimensional weirdness if Electromagnetism doesn't need it? Or do we even understand that fully either? I doubt it.
Basically, it's harder to hide infinities in quantum field theories that deal with gravity (in the jargon, are not "renormalizable"). |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|