English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Doesnt science have a hard time trying to define gravity , how can then can gravity be schrinking into a small volume. Isnt that the inverse of the idea of the big bang singularity?

2006-11-28 13:45:47 · 5 answers · asked by goring 6 in Science & Mathematics Physics

5 answers

Gravity is defined in a new term. That is the latest report
of the atomic relativities of the quasar versus the quantum
in an isolated directive. Defined by the mineral interactions.
What? Gravity has the interactive quantities added to the
average force of one planet attracts to another Plus the ionic
pentanmeters(depends on the substance with conditions).
So gravity is present in all materials if left in free space, or put
into orbits, or put on a plane. This last set is the theoretic
gravity of space infinitives to the nth degree, showing that all
materials have the origin of gravity values as established at
the desk of the elements chart, and its properties. The flight
of planets is a true measure of gravities, showing such things
as anti-gravity points like in a space capsule. The interaction
really never out drives the elements chart standard.

2006-11-28 15:03:22 · answer #1 · answered by mtvtoni 6 · 0 1

Not as hard as you seem to think. True, not every detail is worked out but the gist is that Gravity is the curviture of Space-Time. If the universe was a rubber sheet with weights o n it, gravity would be the dips the weights make.

Gravity by it's nature tries to take matter down to as small a radius as it can. In the case of a star, the energy released by the nuclear reactions are pushing it back out and a balance is reached.

As for how this relates to the Big Bang, it wasn't gravity that blew it apart. In fact, Gravity is a consequence of the existance of matter which came after the bang.

2006-11-28 13:55:09 · answer #2 · answered by moronreaper 2 · 0 0

Here's how they explain it. Gravitational pull is mathematically defined as GmM/r^2 That's the gravitational constant times the masses in question, divided by the radius squared. So, by all the mass drawn into a smaller radius, the overall net pull is LARGER because denominator is not SMALLER. Hence, the matter converging and causing a large amount of energy (and thus) causing that energy to be released and causing the big bang.

*You have to remember, they are talking about enough mass for everything you see around you (including the other galaxies)

2006-11-28 13:49:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The expansion of the universe is still happening on a big scale; however, local events like asteroids smashing into Jupiter and a ball falling back to Earth overcome this expansion just as a colapsing star would.

2016-05-22 23:57:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it is just a matter of something being more or less dense. a black hole is an example of something with a small radius and great density and therefore what you call concentrated gravity.

2006-11-28 14:24:04 · answer #5 · answered by karl k 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers