Did we ever figure out what the fuck causes gravity?
Yeah, it's the curvature of spacetime.
Gravitation is Newton's first law in curved spacetime.
>>13073207>>13073219I thought that was thrown out.So what causes the curvature of spacetime?Mass?That's a shit explanation It just says "Well gravity exists here were mass is so mass must create gravity".That's on par with "Who made God? God did.".
>>13073242>So what causes the curvature of spacetime?Energy. We have observed spacetime curvature around objects with a great mass but also as waves that are rippling through the universe.
>What causes x?>y>What causes y?>(ad infinitum)why do you assume everything has a cause? You have no reason for doing so
>>13073265>Energy>What is energy?>The potential to do work>What is potential energy?>Stored up energy, like a ball on top of a hill about to roll down >What is creating that energy?>GravityIt's a useless self referential definition.How do you create gravity?You can't because the definition requires gravity to already exist. >>13073280anon please.
It is a simulation, so some rules hardcoded in the program.You can't find the causes in the effects.
>>13073202According to General Relativity, gravity is curvature of spacetime caused by energy density or mass (same thing).According to Quantum Mechanics, gravity should be its own quantum field and interact with the other fields via a currently undiscovered carrier boson called graviton.These two models are the most accepted understandings of reality, and they are irreconcilable. Uniting them or making a new more accurate model would bring us closer to a theory of everything.
>>13073573So we still have made fuck all progress on gravity.Thanks anon.t. timetravler
>>13073202string theory is a consistent theory of quantum gravity, whether or not it is correct.we'll find out once we've ruled out every string vacuum, I suppose
>>13073587I'm very sceptical of String Theoryhttps://youtu.be/6RQ6ugMWZ0c
>>13073625Well the 'space time' theory is just retarded.Honestly physics seems like a dead field if you are not a string cultist.
>>13073632>Well the 'space time' theory is just retarded.Explain what you mean by this.
>>13073635>gravity = curves in spacetimeIs just a complex way of saying gravity exists because it just does.
>>13073202>Mass>Exchange of gravitons
>>13075537The first answer is retarded.The second answer is based on a lot of pure theory,
>>13073202No, where does gravity come from or its source is something unknown. Gravity is too complicated, that's why Quantum Gravity for instance is an unknown dead end in current science.
>>13073202Literally no one know, they've only created accurate models.
>>13073202yo momma so fat she causes gravity
>>13073202We've been attempting to run advanced modeling tests on some of the most massive objects in the universe for years now, but your mom has a very busy schedule, so no, not yet
>>13073280If not everything has a cause, how can I trust deductive reasoning?
>>13073632>Honestly physics seems like a dead field if you are not a string cultist.Could not be further from the truth.first of all, cosmology/GR is thriving in a rebirth the likes of which we haven't seen in decades, from LIGO to black holes its an incredibly active fieldsecondly, string theory is essentially an offshoot of high energy particle physics which is one specific facet of physics. other fields like condensed matter are far more active and comprise much much larger chunks of the overall physics world. even within high energy particle physics, there are many areas of research that strike equally at the "core" of things, like the search for neutrino-less double beta decay. Observation of this would be leaps and bounds towards answering the baryon assymetry problem, which is equally as big as the whole gravity problem (and possibly related as well)thirdly, string theory (to my understanding), while a beautiful elegant solution that we wish was true, has failed to deliver on basically any of its promises. we have no experimental evidence for any of the theory, and if your theory doesnt match experiment, it isnt a valid model of reality.so basically, physics is a dead field if you ARE a string cultist, and is a thriving, growing, and sometimes even fast paced field, if you're studying the right things
>>13075939I never heard about any of this, thanks anon
>>13073202>Did we ever figure out what the fuck causes gravity?I figured it out. just study the higgs boson and you should figure it out soon enough.
>>13073202when a boson reaches a energy state above gamma rays the building blocks of said boson gravitate together into a sub atomic particle. it also works as a gluon. remember you read the answer on 4chan first.
>>13075961no problem, take it with a grain of salt bc im still an undergrad but i am going into my senior year so im not a complete pleb. condensed matter (the field im working in) is really fuckin cool and makes up a shockingly large amount of actual physics research, something like 30-40% of physics research is done in this field. most people think they like particle physics because it feels the most "fundamental" but that isn't really true. its a form of reductionism, to just continually ask "what's smaller? ok, now whats smaller than THAT." you'll answer your questions, but it doesn't work in reverse, you won't be able to reconstruct our experience of the physical world and other fields and sciences based on this alone. that's what condensed matter seeks to do: study emergence. rather than taking one thing and cutting it in half, lets take a lot of things and see how they act differently. one atom won't superconduct on its own, no matter how many times you split it apart. but enough of those non-elementary particles acting in unison, and suddenly shit starts floating. to quote the book on solid state physics by simon, "why are metals shiny and why do they feel cold? why is glass transparent? why is water a fluid, and why does fluid feel wet, why is rubber soft and stretchy?" particle physics doesn't answer these questions. condensed matter does
>>13075986particles dont exist
>>13076082light isn't real. kek.
>>13073265Very high IQ poster also completely accurate answer although sparse.
>>13076136>cant even explain reflection with out making up 'virtual electrons'photons are not real
>>13073307>It's a useless self referential definition.Right, your incorrect description is useless.
>>13076171yet you see your reflection when the light interacts with your optic nerve and you can turn light in subatomic particles that constitute all matter on the periodical table of elements. virtual electrons? i don't even know where you came up with that shit but that some bullshit right there. stop being a parrot and use your fucking head kid.
>>13076186Then give me a process for creating gravity under the 'curvature of spacetime' theory that does not presuppose or require the existence of gravity prior to the process.
>>13073265>energy creates gravitythen why don't I get pulled towards nuclear power plants? checkmate physiologists
>>13076420as a mathematical psychicist, we can use the axiom of choice and choose not to get pulled in. cmon anon, dont be a brainlet
>>13076420the bigger a star the greater is gravity the greater is energy. your jokes aren't really that funny.
>>13076241According to photon cultists when a photon hits something it is absorbed and turned into an election. Somewhere else nearby an electron is converted into a photon and launched back out and this is how reflection works.How does this new photon know what angle to launch itself at? A virtual particle popped into existence and transmitted the information from the absorbed photon to the emitted one. Such is the depravatiy of the particleists
>>13076569The God cultists know that it is God in His wisdom and kindness who decides thedirection of every reflected electron at any time. Of course they also implicitly suggestthat He is pretty much an idiot to have to do this much work, instead of simply adding arule to nature to always conserve energy and momentum.
>>13076569light diffraction based on the crystalline matrix structure of the mirror. that shit your posting sounds like shit. i wouldn't buy that either.
>>13076073this. Its very harder to see the bigger picture for us as or life spans are to short to be able to receive large changes that could lead to bigger fundamental discoveries. We cant just zoom out for ever also there is the limit of how far in the past/future we can see. Biggest problem whit gravity is its a macroscopic force it has bigger effect on large clusters of matter. But its less relevant on the molecular-nuclear scale basicly the effects of gravity get smaller and smaller the more closer you look at particle level.
>>13076569>According to photon cultists when a photon hits something it is absorbed and turned into an election.No wonder American politics is so fucked up.
>>13076569>it is absorbed and turned into an electiondemocrats will defend this
>>13073202Everything is always falling
>>13073242But you could say, "some quality of matter creates the phenomenon we refer to as gravity".Is it just a coincidence that the denser matter is, the less volume is required to have the same effect on the curvature of spacetime compared to matter that is mess dense?
>>13073265Do you think that there is some link between gravity and magnetism? Not a direct link, but some distant relation between the two?
>>13076082the double-slit experiment would like to have a word with you about that, anon>>13076136then what are you seeing with?
>>13076610>Of course they also implicitly suggest that He is pretty much an idiot to have to do this much workWell of course! He is just a noble gas, it's got no brain, so of course it's idiotic, it's just a slave to physics, duh!
>>13076569>According to photon cultists when a photon hits something it is absorbed and turned into an (electron).Fixed your phone fuck-up.Also fixing your brain fuck-up: HOW DO YOU THINK PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS WORK, SMOOTHBRAIN?