Matter has mass, mass occupies space and disturbs it by occupying it. Mass pulls on the "fabrics" of space and curves it, the product of curved space is gravity.
2007-05-17 14:26:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Yahoo! 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The direct answer is that the force of gravity is a product of a mass to energy relationship. This is seen in the physics trilogy, which is: E = mc2, m = E/c2, and c2 = E/m. The last is that of a field of gravity, or that of a field of physical time. These two are the same concept having different names. Notice that were a mass to have no energy (heat energy) then there could be no field of gravity propagated. Were a mass the size of our planet to have no heat energy within, then that mass would have no field of gravity about it.
Stephen Hawking in “A Brief History of Time,” page 92, paragraph 3, states; “Like light, gravitational waves carry energy away from the objects that emit them.” Notice that the force of gravity performs work and in order for work to be performed there must be an energy source. If there is not an energy source then the force of gravity must be being created in all mass at all times. Either there is an energy source or there is continual creation. There is a short, easy to read writing at http://360.yahoo.com/noddarc entitled "An Experiment You Can Help With" that may be of interest to you.
2007-05-17 17:12:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by d_of_haven 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gravity is still an unsovled mystery in physics today. However, the latest accepted theory is Albert Einstein's General Relativity. It states that gravity is not a force, but an effect from mass warping the space-time fabric. Think of a heavy ball on a stretched sheet...the ball would 'warp' the sheet and if you would set another lighter object on the sheet, it would roll towards the heavier mass. This theory has been experimentally tested and proved, but there are still many things about gravity that we do not know yet.
2007-05-17 17:31:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No one knows. Even more puzzling is, why does gravity never seem to wear out?
The force of gravity times distance moved against that gravity pull = W = Fd = work, which is just another name for expended kinetic energy. So every time we lift something (m), or fly something, or just go up in an elevator, we are converting kinetic energy into potential energy = mgh, where h = height from where the lifting began. g = the acceleration due to the force of gravity acting on a mass (m).
But, and this is a BIG BUT, we can get that kinetic energy back by simply lowering the thing we raised. Thus, PE = mgh = 1/2 mv^2 = KE when the plane comes in for a landing, the elevator goes to ground floor, or you put that heavy load back on the floor. In other words, in a frictionless world, the energy gravity causes us to expend going up is returned full-fold as kinetic energy coming back down. And no matter how often we lift and lower that box, ride up and down on that elevator, or take off and land, we will have the same PE and KE...it does not wear out from usage.
Now why is that?
2007-05-17 17:05:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by oldprof 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, they are pretty much defined by each other, so I'm not sure you can really separate the properties. As to what causes gravity, we still don't know, though there are certainly theories. If someone can answer that question, they might get the Nobel prize in physics.
2007-05-17 16:45:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Alex P 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's what all sane physicists would like to know. If you can solve that young man, you'll win a Nobel and a place with the greats like Newton, Galileo, Einstein, Cantor, Archimedes and so on.
Truth is, no one knows, that's just the way it is in our universe.
2007-05-17 16:45:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by qspeechc 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
So we don't have mass just floating around in the atmosphere willy-nilly. Of course.
2007-05-17 16:47:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Brandy B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do you mean, why does mass exert a gravitational pull?
2007-05-17 16:43:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Nrassm 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
To enable primordial interaction through field.
2007-05-17 16:43:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
it has density so yeah i think so
2007-05-17 16:42:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋