What Happens to Gravity Fields When They Change?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of changing gravitational fields, particularly whether altering a gravitational field could create another field, and the nature of gravitational waves. Participants explore concepts related to general relativity, energy-mass conversion, and the composition of gravitational fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether changing a gravitational field could create another field, suggesting a need for a massive object to be converted to energy rapidly.
  • Another participant asserts that energy couples gravitationally like mass does, indicating that converting mass to energy would not change its gravitational influence if the energy remains in the same volume.
  • A participant inquires about the composition of gravitational fields, comparing them to electric and magnetic fields.
  • One participant discusses the idea that gravity might be a gauge theory, suggesting that if true, gravitons would be the quantum of the gravitational field, similar to photons in electromagnetism.
  • Another participant challenges the analogy of gravitational waves to water waves, emphasizing that general relativity describes wave-like solutions to Einstein's equations without using the term "space-time continuum."
  • There is a disagreement about terminology, with one participant insisting on the importance of precise language in scientific discussions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of gravitational fields and the terminology used in general relativity. There is no consensus on the implications of changing gravitational fields or the validity of certain analogies.

Contextual Notes

Some participants rely on specific terminology from general relativity, which may not align with common interpretations. The discussion includes unresolved questions about the nature of gravitational waves and the implications of mass-energy conversion.

Phymath
Messages
183
Reaction score
0
maybe I am having dirreha of the mind but has anyone ever researched, what happens when we change a gravational field does it create someother field? like idk how'd we do this but you'd need to make a huge massive thing and then covert most of it to enegry in a matter of less then a second, does anyone think that would create another field? kinda like EMR? or am i just rambling about nothing, but if it does create another field shouldn't any accelerating mass create a changing grav field? (such as an orbiting moon) let me know what all of u think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Energy couples gravitationally just like mass does. Converting a lump of mass to energy will not change its gravitation (assuming you can keep the energy in the same volume as the original mass).

When masses are moved around, gravitational waves are produced which carry away energy. This is in analogy to moving charges, which create electromagnetic waves.

- Warren
 
ok...so we know EMR is made of E fields and B fields, what do u think a G field is composed of?
 
In truth, the notion that E and B are distinct is false. They are really just two sides of the same coin. In most higher physics, they are treated together.

If gravity turns out to be a gauge theory, the graviton will be the quantum of the gravitational field, as the photon is the quantum of the electromagnetic field.

If not, then gravity is simply different from the other three forces, and is not mediated by any force-carrying particle. General relativity describes gravity as the curvature of space. Gravitational waves are perfectly well-defined in general relativity, but there is no such thing as a graviton.

- Warren
 
yet... but thanks for all the insite warren, can u tell what does GR say about Grav waves, if i remember right, isn't that when a mass is "dropped" on the Space-time contin. it creates a ripping wave like a stone in a pond, while curving the space-time around it like a rubber sheet?
 
GR doesn't say anything about analogies like water waves or rubber sheets. It also doesn't say anything about a "space-time continuum," because such a thing doesn't exist. What it DOES say is that there are wave-like solutions to Einstein's equation.

- Warren
 
whoa, what are u talking about?! what do u mean it says there is not space-time contin?
 
Get a book on general relativity. Note that there is no reference to anything called a "space-time continuum" anywhere in it. The term "continuum" simply doesn't mean anything relevant to science.

What there is is a four-dimensional manifold called simply "spacetime."

- Warren
 
dude are siersously going to fight me over a word that means the same thing! holy crap man, but thanks for the gravity help lol
 
  • #10
Yes, I certainly am going to correct you when you use words in improper ways. Scientists are sticklers about proper word use, because it's critical for us to understand each other. If you intend on continuing in your science education, get used to it. :smile:

- Warren
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 219 ·
8
Replies
219
Views
17K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K