Could gravity be made by electromagnetism?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Electro522, Dec 7, 2011.

1. Electro522Registered Senior Member

Messages:
52
This question has plagued me for a very long time. I'm sure every one knows that everything that has matter has gravity, no matter how small. We also know of the 4 primary forces of the Universe, but what if there is only 3 with gravity being made by the attraction of electrons to protons that are part of a different atom. The more atoms you have, the more "attractive" you are. We currently do not know what makes gravity, so, is this the possible source of gravity?

to hide all adverts.
3. AlexGLike nailing Jello to a treeValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,304
No.

to hide all adverts.
5. billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,653
Nope.

to hide all adverts.
7. D-9Registered Member

Messages:
26
We can measure the electromagnetic force, it decays way too quickly with distance; gravity is weak but is carried incredibly far.

They may be facets of the same force as per the theory of everything, but electromagnetism is not causing gravity according to our current knowledge.

8. mathmanValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,942
Both gravity and electromagnetism obey inverse square law as a function of distance.

9. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
It has been argued it can. mind you, more evidence points to otherwise, to be fair.

10. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
Gravity at best is psuedoforce.

11. Electro522Registered Senior Member

Messages:
52
Have you ever heard of the Cameleon? The 5th hypothetical force that can act like every other force? Wouldn't that be a psuedoforce?

12. Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
What physics do you consider for gravity?

13. James RJust this guy, you know?Staff Member

Messages:
37,189
Gravity is always attractive. Electric forces can attract or repel. So, there's one difference right there.

Also, electric forces are produced by electric charge, whereas gravity is produced by mass. While there are apparently two types of charge, there's only one type of mass.

Finally, the strengths of the gravitational and electric forces are vastly different.

These are just three reasons why gravity can't be electromagnetism.

14. James RJust this guy, you know?Staff Member

Messages:
37,189
What is a pseudoforce?

15. AlexGLike nailing Jello to a treeValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,304
Well there's the thing reiku, it can't be argued.

We know quite a bit about how electromagnetism works. We have a whole civilization built upon our understanding. And we know that it acts nothing like gravity, follows different laws, and have different realms of applicability.

So no, it can't be argued.

16. Aqueous Idflat Earth skepticValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,152
Electrically neutral masses have mutual gravitation. Even if you start with no other physics but this, finding a nexus seems impossible.

17. D-9Registered Member

Messages:
26
True, but their strength is a lot different; electromagnetism's strength decreases much more rapidly over distance than gravitation. Others have pointed out more reasons why it is highly unlikely that gravity is a product of electromagnetism. There just isn't a strong correlation, let alone a mechanism to connect such a correlation if it existed.

18. OnlyMeValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,914

As James points out there are differences between gravity and electromagnetism, sufficient to support a position that they are not, at least directly related.

In almost all of these discussions I begin from a more classical view of both gravity and inertia and try to work forward. By classical I refer more to a practical perspective than a Newtonian view. How do things appear "in the world", and as a matter of experience? The problem is that this has not provided any progress toward even partial unification of GR and QM. Attempts to develop quantum gravity have had similar problems. At some point there must be some connection. Both gravitation and electromagnetism are required within the context of any fundamental description of the universe, as we have come to understand it.

Electromagnetism and quantum fields are fundamental aspects of more than just the electromagnetic nature of "atoms" and matter... And while James is again correct in that, "gravity can't be electromagnetism", this is not the same as saying that what we experience as gravitation, does not emerge from the same underlying fundamental "subatomic" interactions.

Without presenting the following as a definitive or conclusive example, consider the potential that inertia is emergent from QM as an interaction between the motion of matter in space and the quantum fluctuations of virtual particles of 'vacuum energy', expressed through the DCE, Dynamical Casimir Effect. At least from an initially superficial view, this would be consistent with SR and the Lorentz Transformations and what we understand of inertial and relativistic mass. The DCE interaction between matter and 'vacuum energy' would be trivial at classical velocities and significant at relativistic velocities, to the point of representing an underlying mechanism for the limiting velocity, the speed of light in vacuum, $c$.

The similarity between inertia and gravity as expressed in the equivalence principal, though it does not provide a direct and obvious connection, between gravitation, and the DCE and QM, does suggest that one may exist.., just beyond current explanation.

Setting aside the issue of gravitation, the implications of a connection between the QM effects associated with the DCE and the motion of matter and inertia, does have some potentially significant implications for inertia and the recent FTL neutrino results from OPERA. While matter, an atom.., may be considered to be neutrally charged macroscopically, at the subatomic scale it is always a composite structure of charges components.., protons, neutrons and electrons.., as such it is not difficult to associate any motion of matter, through space — or the vacuum energy of QM, as generating a DCE. At the same time it would be difficult to associate the motion of a neutrino through space, having a small mass and NO charge or magnetic moment, as being subject to or involving an equivalent DCE. From this perspective, neutrinos may not be subject to the same inertial limitations of "ordinary" matter, composed of charged particles.

Always keep in mind that "electrically neutral masses" are never in the case of "ordinary" matter uncharged and neutral at subatomic scales. Electrically neutral refers to the organization of matter at and above the scale of atoms. Of "stable" particles below the scale of the atom, at least at present, only the netrino remains without charge and EM interaction.

19. Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
I can't answer without using my own theory, so I'm unfortunately locked out of the discussion, even though my gravity is now affecting Voyager 1.

20. kwhilbornBannedBanned

Messages:
2,088
I wouldn't use the words electromagnetic, as we know too much about magnetism, and it is definitely different from gravity.

I did use this theory in a science fiction story however.

21. originHeading towards oblivionValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,586
Thank God for that!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

22. kwhilbornBannedBanned

Messages:
2,088
@ pincho paxton,

It is sad that stating any sort of hypothesis that is not already a proven fact is so difficult on sciforums. I'd like to see another gravity theory, even if it is for the different perspective. I am sure mankind does not yet know everything despite what people here think.

23. Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
It's just this room, because it's based on current science. My explanation would be very strange to comprehend in here.