Do you think electromagnetism is an emergent property of the geometry of spacetime just like gravity is theorised to be?
>>15284482No, it is the creator of it
>>15284482we don't have access to reality, all we can do is reverse engineer observations by explaining them in terms of abstractions we can understand.no one knows what electrons actually are so we pretend they're vibrations and oscillations that can be combined with other vibrations and oscillations. but this is all a fairy tale, just because the symbols make sense doesn't mean that reality must conform to the abstractions humans use to make sense of it.anyway, good luck with figuring out the fundamental principles of reality with your monkey brain
>>15284504
>>15284482No. Electromagnetism can be created, modulated and removed. Gravity is always present where there is mass.
>>15284482>spacetime>>>/x/
>>15284482Gravity is not an "emergent property of the geometry of spacetime" as you say.Gravity can be modeled as such. Just because you can model "spacetime" this way doesn't mean you understand gravity.We don't understand what gravity is. We just have a good way of describing mathematically how it works on large scales.We could model electromagnetism in a similar way. In fact, that's pretty much what quantum electrodynamics is. You can model electromagnetism as a phenomenon of the "quantum field," which is the manifold physists use for their mathematical description of electromagnetism on quantum scales."Spacetime" and the "quantum field" are simply abstract concepts that are useful for making the math work. We shouldn't think of them as concrete objective things that exist, because we don't know that.
Yes. They emerge from the same spacetime.
>>15284524Gravity is indistinguishable from the other forces at a small enough scale, what now?
>>15284638congratulations, you're now at the forefront of theoretical physics. no one knows how anything works and their best hope is a bunch of vibrating manifolds. the one dimensional case is called a string
>>15284504This. true knowledge is impossible.
>anyway, good luck with figuring out the fundamental principles of reality with your monkey brainthanks anon wishing you the best as well
>>15284514> basedLooks like a panel out of sandman
>>15284482Point to the electromagnetic/gravity well in space where no body of atoms exist...I'll wait.
>>15284861I'm an ultra genius so I don't need luck but thanks anyway
>>15284519>schizophasia>t.FILTEREDGot back to /lit/, for if you cannot understand the words of /sci/ you will NEVER be a scientist of any kind, EVER.
most humans have lost their connection with the Earth's magnetic field while all other animals use it everyday for navigation.
>>15284670on the contrary, true knowledge is possible and is the unfolding process of a life well lived because the only real truths are actions, everything else is a symbolic fantasy
So Einstein and others tried to geometrize electromagnetism the way Einstein gravity does for gravity in the 1920s and failed.
>>15288613It didn't fail. Kaluza-Klein theory and plenty of ideas inspired by it are still around, it just has never been promoted to the rank of an empirically verified theory.For what it's worth the standard description of electromagnetism as a U(1) gauge bundle is already a fairly geometric picture.
>>15284582It’s unfortunate how this basic distinction between conceptual models and actual reality is so often forgotten. Christian Wolff, a German philosopher just prior to Kant, referred to this as the fallacy of subreption, whereby we project and confuse our conceptions and understandings of things with the things themselves. It’s a rampant phenomenon and almost unavoidable at a certain level
>>15284582You can literally see space curve
>>15288891Post proof.
>>15284670knowledge =/= the truthRegardless of whether my interpretations are true, it remains true that my experience IS knowledge itself
>>15288926There are roughly six brazilian pictures of gravitational lensing out there.
