Why is gravity attractive while electromagnetism is repulsive

[Dihydrogen Monoxide]

Do we have any idea what is going on here?

[mkirkpatrick]

Do we have any idea what is going on here?

Are you really sure that this is the case?





regards michael.

[Dihydrogen Monoxide]

Are you really sure that this is the case?





regards michael.

Either way is a useful starting point. I don't particularly agree with the universal push theory of gravity. I'd be more inclined to think that an attractive force is a repulsive force which hits a snag when the particles interact resulting in a net attractive force. What does it get tangled in, though?

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear Dihydrogen Monoxide and friends,

I suppose that what you mean “electromagnetic force is repulsive” actually it is Coulomb repulsive force between the same kind of charge particles, right? If it is so, we have to understand first how gravity works, i.e. how masses attract each other. Then please explain first how you visualize the mechanism of gravity?

Sincerely,
Nimit

[Pinčiukas]

Hello, (be careful with my English ;D)

(some of my thoughts)
what if mass and charge are different components (real and imaginary) of the same property (z = m + i*q)?

Then:
F = z1*z2/rr = m1*m2/rr - q1*q2/rr + (imaginary thing)
the real part represents gravitation and Coulomb forces.
_______________

And one question (:
When charges move, they create magnetic field.
When massive object moves, its mass changes.
Why cant we say that moving massive objects also create some "unknown moving gravitation" (just like magnetic) field, which creates the force and the mass remains constant?


thanks, and sorry for my English

[vacuum-mechanics]

Hello, (be careful with my English ;D)

(some of my thoughts)
what if mass and charge are different components (real and imaginary) of the same property (z = m + i*q)?

Then:
F = z1*z2/rr = m1*m2/rr - q1*q2/rr + (imaginary thing)
the real part represents gravitation and Coulomb forces.

Dear Pinciukas,

You can create any new idea! But you should have its philosophic idea (or model) for explaining where it comes from, and why and how it is to be so.

When charges move, they create magnetic field.

According to special theory of relativity, the moving charge is also increasing its charge!

When massive object moves, its mass changes.
Why cant we say that moving massive objects also create some "unknown moving gravitation" (just like magnetic) field, which creates the force and the mass remains constant?

While the moving object's mass is increased, its gravitation force is also increased!

Cheer,
Nimit

[Cubola Zaruka]

'what if mass and charge are different components (real and imaginary) of the same property (z = m + i*q)?

Then:
F = z1*z2/rr = m1*m2/rr - q1*q2/rr + (imaginary thing)
the real part represents gravitation and Coulomb forces.'

This is interesting, but would imply that gravity and electromagnetism are of equal strength, whereas the latter is significantly stronger. By attracting matter towards all other matter, gravity seems to defy entropy, which is a fundamental property of time but a reduction in the relative rate at which time 'passes' would reduce the rate of entropy.

[Pinčiukas]

This is interesting, but would imply that gravity and electromagnetism are of equal strength, whereas the latter is significantly stronger.

it is significantly stronger between protons or electrons and that would just mean that m(proton) << q(proton) or m(electron) << q(electron)

(:

[vacuum-mechanics]

'what if mass and charge are different components (real and imaginary) of the same property (z = m + i*q)?

Dear Cubola Zaluka,

What is the reason behind the assumtion for using the complex number?

Cheer,

Nimit

[ddaker]

is it at all possible that gravity is not a mysterious particle, but rather a geometrical side-effect of particle positions?

also? what is the speed of gravity? and the speed of electromagnetic forces? I'm sure this is not the place to learn basic physics, so if someone could post a link to pick this stuff up from, that would be great.

by the way? hypothetically speaking: if you could look at the tiniest particle in the universe, would it be floating there, or be surrounded by some sort of cosmological material? its difficult for me to imagine that at quantum levels we are 'all' suspended in a vacum? surely we are sitting (fundamental particles) in some sort of geometric lattice?