Artificial Gravity Field Generator Possible?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of creating an artificial gravity field generator, exploring concepts from general relativity, energy-mass equivalence, and gravitational effects. Participants examine theoretical approaches and implications of compressing energy to generate gravitational fields, as well as the nature of mass and gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that emitting energy equivalent to the mass of the Earth could create Earth-like gravity, suggesting the use of magnetic fields for compression.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the concept of compressing energy, noting that mass is the most compressed form of energy and questioning the feasibility of generating significant gravitational force from energy production.
  • A participant introduces the stress-energy tensor from general relativity, indicating that gravity is influenced by more than just mass, including motion and pressure.
  • There is a challenge regarding the idea that mass must correspond to the size of an object, with one participant asserting that mass is an intrinsic property independent of size.
  • Another participant acknowledges the complexity of the discussion, noting that while mass is intrinsic, large masses typically correspond to large bodies, but hypothetical scenarios could involve smaller objects with equivalent mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between mass, energy, and gravity, with no consensus reached on the feasibility of the proposed methods for generating artificial gravity.

Contextual Notes

Some statements rely on assumptions about energy-mass conversion and gravitational effects that may not be universally accepted or fully explored within the discussion.

earamsey
Messages
39
Reaction score
1
I read about an equation; [tex]E = mc^2[/tex] and concluded that [tex]m=\frac{E}{c^2}[/tex]. Therefore, I assume that one can create Earth gravity by emitting energy equivalent to mass of earth.

I also read that, simply put, that a stars gravity can be amplified when it's core collapses, or compresses creating intense gravity field.

I put everything together and assume that you can create Earth gravity by compressing a fractional amount of E equivalent to mass of earth. You can compress it using magnetic fields similar to what they use in experimental fusion generators. And one would already have such a thing because I would assume it would require lots of energy to compress E of size [tex]n \% M[/tex] to size some size [tex]m[/tex].

Why would this not work, I assume it would not since NASA is not researching any thing like because they are proposing spinning people like a spinning top to get Earth gravity.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I really would know nothing about this, but my first guess would be E=mc^2 is saying that a certain amount of mass is equivalent to a certain about of energy proportionate to 1/c^2, and that they can be transferred back and forth between the two. Not that they act in the same way (energy can't act as mass, and vice versa, until they are transformed into the other one).

But like I said, I don't really know anything about it. I would be curious to see what someone who really knows their stuff would say.
 
In general relativity, "mass" is not the (only) source of gravity. In fact, there is something called the stress-energy tensor (for some basic information about it, you can consult the wiki entry on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress-energy_tensor).
That tensor contains energy (including the mass-equivalent) but also motion, pressure and things like that. All that generates "gravity".
 
Ha, showed me :P. Cool.

That helps a theory of mine actually. haha
 
I'm not quite sure what you mean by compressing energy, but the most "compressed" form of energy we have is mass. To get the mass of the Earth requires a body about the size of the earth. The worldwide total energy production corresponds to about 100 pounds, which has virtually no perceptible gravitational force.
 
...

are you talking relativistically here...? Or otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Vanadium 50 said:
To get the mass of the Earth requires a body about the size of the earth.

That is incorrect. The mass is an intrinsic quality of matter independent of size. This might also be the basis of Earamsey's error regarding the amplification of a gravitational field. If a supermassive star spews its guts and becomes a black hole, its gravitational field is actually less than that of the original, since there is less mass remaining. The critical factor is that the gravitational attraction is based upon the distance between the centres of the involved masses, not the diameters. If our sun were to somehow be compressed into a neutron star or a black hole (not possible by natural methods), the orbits of the planets would not be altered.
 
Danger said:
The mass is an intrinsic quality of matter independent of size.

True...but. Bodies that weigh as much as planets are the size of planets. (I'm ignoring exotic things like neutron stars and black holes, which are even less realistic) Sure, we could make something that weighs as much of the Earth but out of tungsten instead - it's radius would be 2/3 the radius of the earth.
 
Ah... gotcha. Sorry for the intrusion. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 159 ·
6
Replies
159
Views
16K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
10K