[Guille]

Are gravity and/or light waves or particles?

More importantly: why do you think these?

the poll works like this: you are supposed to choose one of the gravity possibilites and another choose is one of the light possibilities. please. thanks.

if you think light or/and gravity are something else, explain it.

[Masa Hiryuu]

I find this Question dificult to awnser with the answers provided.

Personally I think Light is a Product of our Perception. Like Fingers we use to Interprit the world around us and to gather information. The universal "Speed Limit" is like the frequency of our processors processing that information in relative time.

Please tell me if you dont understand what I am trying to convey

[Guille]

1. you are contradicting a very important statement from special relativity (Albert Einstein, 1905) which is that light has a constant speed, no matter what. You are saying that light has relative speed. product of us? then, what do you think it "is" in reality (the light)? and, what do you think about gravity?

[Guille]

BTW,

I voted for gravity to be particles in order to have my gravitational precesses or effects fix. I voted light to be both, because light is formed of particles, photons, but light is also a wave because it is, for example, the rate of "photons wall" which has frequency, length, width.............and other wave caracteristics.

[Masa Hiryuu]

I never said that light did not have a constant speed (although I do believe that light does not). But in what I was proposing that light does not physically exist the way that we think it does.

Light i believe is propogated by the transfer of information (ex. force from one body acting on another body) and the "Constant Speed of light" is actually the Rate at which those processes are percieved. That is why Transfer of Energy between bodies or from bodies seems to go at a constant rate. I was trying to use an analogy on Processor Frequencies to try and explain it but I did a bad job I guess.

I never tried to say that relativity was wrong (Although I do think alot of it is close but not quite right) but I think what I said was misunderstood. This is a Dificult Concept for alot of People to understand when I try to explain my theroy

[Masa Hiryuu]

I think I have a better way to explain my concept.

I once saw a thread somewhere (I dont know if it was on this Forum or another) Where someone had said that some scientist had tried to calculate out the lifespan of the universe and when he put Dark Energy into the equasion the universe tore itself apart within a milisecond of its creation.

Now I dont know how true this statement is or if it actually happened, but, it got my cogs turning.

I thought What if our Universe is only lasting for a brief milisecond? And what we are experiencing is all the interactions that happened inside that milisecond in "relative time". Now to an outside observer watching our universe being created (assuming that that is possable) all they would have seen was a brief flash of light. But an observer from within the universe would see the explosion in their own relative time, this means that they would see all the interactions that took place within that explosion at the speed that it could be processed by the observer, or in other words at the speed at which the observer can process all the information from the interactions within the explosion (ex. Physical, Chemical, even Biological). So reguardless of the lifespan of the universe all interactions within that universe would still take place as normal just at a faster speed (or mabee slower) to an outside observer. The information is just processed at different speeds according to the observer so also reguardless of the processing speed of the observer all observers would percieve a constant speed limit at which all these processes took place.

I'm still not sure if this is a good analogy please coment if anyone is confused.

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by quanta07

I vote light, both, particle AND wave behavior observed (4D time object)

I vote gravity as point convergent acceleration, not wave or particle....(5D time object)

I vote light as spherical,radial velocity
I vote gravity as spherical as spherical radial acceleration....

I know these were not some of the options, just observations......q7

x...None of the above and none of the options.
Only partial answers offered.

[AntonioLao]

photon and graviton are both quanta of the quantum fields respectively the electromagnetic field and the gravitational field.

the quantum field theory of the electromagnetic field is QED (quantum electrodynamics). This is a very precise and well tested theory. Most physicists would agree that it is not a theory but a physical law similar to the laws of Newton's.

the quantum field theory of the gravitational field is yet to be decided. the most advanced research along this line are superstring theories and M-theory, supersymmetry and others. But since the graviton is yet to be detected, none of these theories is acceptable. The graviton cannot be detected either as a wave (experiments done by Weber. see http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...ionalWave.html) or as a particle (don't know who is doing it?).

[dleviwing]

Antonio;
Are we trying to find out if gravity is a wave, particle, or something else?
What is the different between space and gravity?
Best regard;
Dave

[Guille]

Originally Posted by dleviwing

What is the different between space and gravity?

I think that gravity is the curvature of space,not spac eitself. It's a property of space-time.

I do have a problem with this, and if gravity is formed by particles (which I beleive) then how can it be the "curvature" of space-time? it seems strange particles being a property of space: it feels enough strange having particles for space!