Is gravity caused by electromagnetism?

Question

If atoms have an electromagnetic charge (eg protons and electrons and perhaps even neutrons have some form of it that is as yet unmeasurable) is gravity caused by electromagnetism? Or perhaps electromagnetism as me may not now know it? Gravity is typically linked with mass; more mass, more gravity. What causes the gravity in the first place though? If the more mass something has the more gravity it has, then isn't that a buildup of all of the electromagnetically charged atoms in that thing? If not, what evidence is against this? GIVE EVIDENCE!

I think many people missed the point of my first question. Why can gravity not be explained by electromagnetism? What is the proof against it. It seems to me, the closer something is to something is to something else, the more they are attracted by gravity. For example, if I am floating in earth's upper orbit, not actually orbiting the earth, don't I move slower to earth than I would if I was on the earth's surface? It seems to me that I see the same effect bringing two magnets together. Had they been separated by some space, and perhaps in space to get rid of friction, the magnets will move together slowly, but the closer the magnets are the stronger they are attracted and therefore the faster they move closer to each other. Why can't gravity be a form of electromagnetism? What evidence can be held against this theory? And don't link me to wikipedia, think about it yourself and give me an intelligent response.

Answer 1

Gravity is a different force. Einstein said that gravity was caused by a distortion in space. Gravity is weak. You don't see two masses slam together if you bring them close unlike magnets. Electromagnetic effects apply to charged particles only and this does not include neutrons.

Answer 2

A planet without a magnetic field still has gravity.

There are four basic forces in nature. Three of these -- electromagnetic, the strong nuclear force, & the weak nuclear force -- are somehow related and there are proofs of this, apparently.

Gravity is the only force that physicis cannot explain on the subatomic level, so it is the one force that, as far as we currently know, is not related to the other three.

Answer 3

Einstein's General Relativity is merely a mathematical description of the effect of gravity; it sidesteps the issue of cause by saying that it just IS. Gravity is supposedly just a warping of space due to the presence of nearby matter. Einstein, himself, was troubled by the apparent effect at a distance with no particle of transmission; this violated thousands of years of philosophical thinking; but the equations work pretty well, so what the heck.

About 300 years ago Fatio and Lesage described a tentative model in which a gas of ultra-numerous, ultra-fast, ultra-tiny corpuscles permeates space. Moving perhaps two billion times faster than light, they bounce off the smallest particles of mass; any two particles of mass look dark to eachother, relative to the background of the corpuscles; therefore they are pushed toward one another. Some serious problems with that model remain unresolved today, but it is still the most promising type of mechanism for a cause of gravity---until I thought up my own variation on that model a few months ago.

In my own Fractal Foam Model of Universes, I substitute P-waves in the Ether Foam, instead of a gas of corpuscles; and instead of bouncing off of particles, the P-waves are either fused together or split apart by particles. The particles are blobs of ether where the bubbles are either smaller or larger than average, so the P-waves change speed and direction when passing thru the particles. Splitting P-waves causes like charges to repel; fusing causes all particles to attract; I haven't quite worked out how unlike charges attract.

The particles (blobs) move thru the ether like the distortion caused by moving a weak lens across a sheet of graph paper.

Answer 4

inspite of what you should pay attention, the only perfect answer is: "we don't recognize!" We do recognize ways the mass of actual products pertains to the curvature of spacetime in first and 2nd order and that's that this curvature of area which we journey as gravity. this is named the "established thought of relativity" and we've understanding approximately it in exceedingly plenty unchanged sort because of the fact 1915. we've made large efforts and gentle advances in linking the predictions of established relativity to experimental (astronomical and cosmological) archives. yet in assessment to for electromagnetic fields and the vulnerable and robust interactions of trouble-free debris, we basically have not got a different microscopic thought of ways the microscopic assets of "mass" of an merchandise pertains to its super scale actual result on different products. Therefor the no longer so naive question of "what motives gravity" is going exceedingly plenty unanswered. the maximum modern theories physicists entertain at present are very far out mathematically and on the same time as there is a brilliant volume of artwork and discovering occurring interior the sector, numerous the secret surrounding gravity remains.

Answer 5

Electromagnetism is dependent on objects having eletric charge. Uncharged particles are unaffected by electromagnetism. Uncharged objects have gravity, so the two theories have to be different.

Answer 6

magnetism is very strong compared to gravity. Gravity is unknown. Gravity can be predicted by mass. I does probably have to do with proton/electron attractions but its unknown.

Answer 7

No. The gravitational force is quite different from electromagnetic forces. For one thing, gravitation is always attractive. The gravitational field is a scalar field: it has a divergence but no curl. Magnetic fields have curl but no divergence.