By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Let's discuss gravity

Soleron said:
highwaystar101 said:
Isn't everything in a constant freefall, but space is curved by an objects mass, so the freefall is curved by the space? The line it follows it straight but the actual space is curved. That's how I have always understood it, but I'm second guessing myself after doing a bit of reading lol.

Yes, you're right.

...have you looked at any books introducing quantum mechanics and similar topics? I particularly recommend In Search of Schrodinger's Cat by John Gribbin.


 

 

No, but I do know of schrodingers cat and the basic idea I think. Is it where he said quantum mechanicals aren't as excluse as they seem and if you put as cat in a box with a device that releases poison when it detects quantum fluctuations, then quantum mechanics has a larger effect than people may think. Is that the right one?

I read Stephen Hawkins universe in a nutshell once, but I'm not sure if I completely understood half of it. More or less my complete understanding of quantum physics has come from (braces self) reading Focus magazine once a month and the occasional issue of new scientist if something interesting is on the cover lol.

 



Around the Network
highwaystar101 said:
Soleron said:
highwaystar101 said:
Isn't everything in a constant freefall, but space is curved by an objects mass, so the freefall is curved by the space? The line it follows it straight but the actual space is curved. That's how I have always understood it, but I'm second guessing myself after doing a bit of reading lol.

Yes, you're right.

...have you looked at any books introducing quantum mechanics and similar topics? I particularly recommend In Search of Schrodinger's Cat by John Gribbin.


 

 

No, but I do know of schrodinger cat and the basic idea I think. It's where he said quantum mechanicals aren't as excluse as they seem and if you put as cat in a box with a device that releases poison when it monitors quantum fluctuations then quantum mechanics has a larger effect than people may think. Is that the right one?

I read Stephen Hawkins universe in a nutshell once, but I'm not sure if I completely understood half of it. More or less my complete understanding of physics has come from (braces self) reading Focus magazine once a month and the occasional issue of new scientist if something interesting is on the cover lol.

Well, the book is about a lot more than just that. And it's very accessible. Maybe your local library has it?

You're sort of right with your understanding. The actual thought experiment (obviously it is not a real experiment) is that the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics says that the cat is both alive and dead at the same time. It is intended to demonstrate how far removed quantum logic is from classical physics logic.

Science magazines are good but tend to either assume a lot (in which case you don't get a full understanding) or nothing (in which case it's dumbed down to the the point of lying).

In any case, having a good understanding of science has a practical use in being able to look at claims on TV or adverts and decide whether they are plausible.

 



Soleron said:
highwaystar101 said:

No, but I do know of schrodinger cat and the basic idea I think. It's where he said quantum mechanicals aren't as excluse as they seem and if you put as cat in a box with a device that releases poison when it monitors quantum fluctuations then quantum mechanics has a larger effect than people may think. Is that the right one?

I read Stephen Hawkins universe in a nutshell once, but I'm not sure if I completely understood half of it. More or less my complete understanding of physics has come from (braces self) reading Focus magazine once a month and the occasional issue of new scientist if something interesting is on the cover lol.

Well, the book is about a lot more than just that. And it's very accessible. Maybe your local library has it?

You're sort of right with your understanding. The actual thought experiment (obviously it is not a real experiment) is that the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics says that the cat is both alive and dead at the same time. It is intended to demonstrate how far removed quantum logic is from classical physics logic.

Science magazines are good but tend to either assume a lot (in which case you don't get a full understanding) or nothing (in which case it's dumbed down to the the point of lying).

In any case, having a good understanding of science has a practical use in being able to look at claims on TV or adverts and decide whether they are plausible.

 

Mm, my local library wont have that book (it has a book written by mylene klass and a load about spiritualism in the science section, that gives you an idea of the kind of library it is lol), but Birmingham library will, so I'll check it out when I finish uni (yay, after four LONG years) in two weeks because I plan to do nothing but read for a whole week. It will be good if it's accessable, so I have a plan now.

mmm, magazines aren't 100% accurate I find. I mostly buy it as a reading digest, something I can dip into whenever I feel like and science is good for that kind of stuff.

 



Soleron said:
highwaystar101 said:
Isn't everything in a constant freefall, but space is curved by an objects mass, so the freefall is curved by the space? The line it follows it straight but the actual space is curved. That's how I have always understood it, but I'm second guessing myself after doing a bit of reading lol.

Yes, you're right.

...have you looked at any books introducing quantum mechanics and similar topics? I particularly recommend In Search of Schrodinger's Cat by John Gribbin.


 

 

 Yes thats a very good book. Have you read the "sequel" called In Search of Schrodinger's Kittens? I haven't, just wanted to know if it was any good.

I also recommend The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. Its a book on relativity, QM and (mainly) String Theory. Also a must read is QED (Quantum Electrodynamics) by Richard Feynman (genius).

@Highwaystar

Stephen Hawking isn't the best explainer out there lol. Brian Greene and especially Richard Feynman make more sense.



highwaystar101 said:
Torillian said:

I do wonder about what causes gravity. Most of what we know is just that it definitely exists and the trends with which it increases and decreases dependent on mass and distance between the objects. But I wonder why it occurs in the first place, or if it is one of those simplest of laws that we'll never be able to find a reason for, it just is. I've heard a little bit about Gravitons which are supposedly packets of gravity that in some way are the reason the force exists, but I haven't really looked into it at all.

Gravitons are a hypothetical elementary particle in the boson family I believe. They are not proven but experimental observations are being conducted, they are looking to analyse gravity waves or something. Also it could lead to telling us the speed of gravity and if it is slower than the speed of light then that means gravity could have mass, which is very interesting. Don't quote me on that though lol

 

Aren't they actually focusing on the Higgs Boson before they get to Gravitons?

Also I found Stephen Hawkings book very easy to understand.  I thought it was great that he kept a sense of humor through the thing too.



Around the Network
DaveD said:
bigger masses attract smaller masses
thus gravity

wouldnt that mean that the moon should crash into us eventually?

 



Kasz216 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Torillian said:

I do wonder about what causes gravity. Most of what we know is just that it definitely exists and the trends with which it increases and decreases dependent on mass and distance between the objects. But I wonder why it occurs in the first place, or if it is one of those simplest of laws that we'll never be able to find a reason for, it just is. I've heard a little bit about Gravitons which are supposedly packets of gravity that in some way are the reason the force exists, but I haven't really looked into it at all.

Gravitons are a hypothetical elementary particle in the boson family I believe. They are not proven but experimental observations are being conducted, they are looking to analyse gravity waves or something. Also it could lead to telling us the speed of gravity and if it is slower than the speed of light then that means gravity could have mass, which is very interesting. Don't quote me on that though lol

 

Aren't they actually focusing on the Higgs Boson before they get to Gravitons?

Also I found Stephen Hawkings book very easy to understand. I thought it was great that he kept a sense of humor through the thing too.

 

Yes, I believe so. I have faith that CERN will have a good idea for the Higgs boson by 2012 *fingers crossed*. What I find cool is that Peter Higgs will be alive to see how the Higgs Boson pans out, which must be a great feeling.

Hawkings book was easy to understand. But I'm not too smart ,so I'm not always sure if I've completely understood something, because I often find myself reading something and realising I had never understood it before.



antfromtashkent said:
DaveD said:
bigger masses attract smaller masses
thus gravity

wouldnt that mean that the moon should crash into us eventually?

 

 

Or drift further away

Each year it drifts 4CM further away from us.



highwaystar101 said:
antfromtashkent said:
DaveD said:
bigger masses attract smaller masses
thus gravity

wouldnt that mean that the moon should crash into us eventually?

 

 

Or drift further away

Each year it drifts 4CM further away from us.

were screwd O_O

 



antfromtashkent said:
DaveD said:
bigger masses attract smaller masses
thus gravity

wouldnt that mean that the moon should crash into us eventually?

 

 

 No because the Sun 'pulls' the moon away from the Earth.