Gravity -- a force or a cause of a force?

In summary: Recently, it has been redefined to be more associated with Einstein's theory of general relativity, which describes gravity as a curvature of spacetime. However, there is still debate over whether gravity should be considered a force or an interaction between masses. George Musser argues that it can be thought of as a force, similar to how a magnet causes a force. Ultimately, the definition of gravity depends on the model and theory being used.
  • #1
zanick
383
23
TL;DR Summary
Gravity has always been considered a force.... more accurately , an force of attraction. recently, it has been redefined to be more associated with einsteinium physics, causing bending of space-time. Is there an official definition that we can use and a citation to show consensus.
When i get into discussions regarding "Gravity" i say that it is a force that is caused by gravity. that the acceleration is due to gravity. there are some, like George Musser who have recently said, "Gravity is not a force, but can be thought of as a force". i think what he means is that there is a force , or force of attraction caused by gravity . is this not a good way to think about it. After all, we all know a magnet is not a force, but it causes a force. gravity causes a force due to two masses being attracted to each other. this force (or attraction) is said to be proportional to the two masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. F(g) = Gm1m2/d2 . if this is true, is there an actual citation i can use for proof of this interpretation of gravity to anyone that asks...or is gravity truly a force as would then magnetism be a force.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
zanick said:
... is gravity truly a force ...
Gravity is an observed phenomenon that can be modeled as an interaction force or space-time geometry.
 
  • Like
Likes Heikki Tuuri, vanhees71 and sophiecentaur
  • #3
so it's not a force, its a phenomenon or a force caused by interaction?... George Musser said " it could be thought of as a force". i think he is right... i thnk it causes a force, like a magnet or other force causes, create a force.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #4
zanick said:
so it's not a force, its a phenomenon or a force caused by interaction?... George Musser said " it could be thought of as a force". i think he is right... i thnk it causes a force, like a magnet or other force causes, create a force.
As I understand it, you want to use the word "gravity" to refer to the phenomenon of gravitation and you want to keep that distinct from the "force of gravity" which is what two massive objects appear to exert on each other.

However, in that case using the word "cause" seems inappropriate. If you model gravitation as a force law that follows ##F=G\frac{m_1m_2}{r^2}## then gravitation does not cause the force of gravity. In that model, gravitation is the force of gravity.

Edit: On the other hand, it's all just a word game. Can you describe a physical experiment that could distinguish between "causes" and "is" in this case? If not, this is philosophy, not science.
 
  • #5
zanick said:
so it's not a force, its a phenomenon or a force caused by interaction?... George Musser said " it could be thought of as a force". i think he is right... i thnk it causes a force, like a magnet or other force causes, create a force.
If you write a sentence talking about the force then your sentence should be clearly written so that the readers understand that you are referring to the force.

If you write a sentence talking about the interaction then your sentence should be clearly written so that the readers understand that you are referring to the interaction.

If you write a sentence talking about some other aspect of gravitation then your sentence should be clearly written so that the readers understand that you are referring to the other aspect.

If all of the above is fulfilled, then the rest doesn’t matter.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, anorlunda, Bystander and 3 others
  • #6
zanick said:
Gravity has always been considered a force... more accurately , an force of attraction. recently, it has been redefined to be more associated with einsteinium physics, causing bending of space-time. Is there an official definition that we can use and a citation to show consensus.

The official definition depends on which model and theory you are using. The most accurate definition of obviously one where we treat gravity as a manifestation of spacetime curvature. The less accurate definition is one of gravity being a force between two masses.

We commonly associate 'truth' with which theory is more accurate. But I find that usually treating things as varying levels of accuracy is more productive than saying things are true or false, right or wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, Vanadium 50 and Dale
  • #7
jbriggs444 said:
On the other hand, it's all just a word game. Can you describe a physical experiment that could distinguish between "causes" and "is" in this case? If not, this is philosophy, not science.
Exactly. The word "is" should always be used carefully and, I would say, never be used to suggest an absolute truth. Where possible "behaves like" etc. should be used, except when the context is within an axiomatic train of thought. (e.g.Maths procedures)
 
  • #8
zanick said:
Summary: Gravity has always been considered a force... more accurately , an force of attraction. recently, it has been redefined to be more associated with einsteinium physics, causing bending of space-time. Is there an official definition that we can use and a citation to show consensus.

When i get into discussions regarding "Gravity" i say that it is a force that is caused by gravity. that the acceleration is due to gravity. there are some, like George Musser who have recently said, "Gravity is not a force, but can be thought of as a force". i think what he means is that there is a force , or force of attraction caused by gravity . is this not a good way to think about it. After all, we all know a magnet is not a force, but it causes a force. gravity causes a force due to two masses being attracted to each other. this force (or attraction) is said to be proportional to the two masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. F(g) = Gm1m2/d2 . if this is true, is there an actual citation i can use for proof of this interpretation of gravity to anyone that asks...or is gravity truly a force as would then magnetism be a force.

"Gravity" is a word of 7 letters and "force" is a word of 5 letters. What they represent in physics is what they are defined to represent.

No amount of philosophical wordplay is going to produce an absolute answer.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, Vanadium 50, sophiecentaur and 1 other person
  • #9
[Alert: This post is marginally off-topic.]

sophiecentaur said:
The word "is" should always be used carefully and, I would say, never be used to suggest an absolute truth.
Bingo @sophiecentaur that's right. But it is a bug in the English language, not just the speaker's fault. The verb "to be" always expresses absolute truth albeit incorrectly.

Linguists sometimes call use of the verb "to be" as "God Mode" speaking. "Gravity is a force" is so final. It allows no nuance, no contradiction, that it might have been the voice of God coming down from the sky. Use of "is" in "gravity is a force" is a linguistic trap expressing absolute truth when it might not be intended.

E-Prime is a dialect of English where nearly all uses of "to be" (including am, is, are, was, were, have been, am being) are eliminated. If we could all learn E-Prime, life would be simpler.

For example, all the above translated to E-Prime:

Bingo @sophiecentaur that would correct the problem. But we should attribute it to a bug in the English language. The verb "to be" always expresses absolute truth albeit incorrectly.

Linguists sometimes call use of the verb "to be" as "God Mode" speaking. "Gravity is a force" sounds so final. It allows no nuance, no contradiction, that it resembles the voice of God coming down from the sky. Use of "is" in "gravity is a force" traps the speaker into expressing absolute truth when he didn't intend that.

A dialect of English called E-Prime eliminates nearly all uses of "to be" (including am, is, are, was, were, have been, am being). If we could all learn E-Prime, we would make life simpler.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #10
anorlunda said:
E-Prime is a dialect of English...

Korzybski shows up in unexpected places...
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
  • #11
Well, you can describe one phenomenon at different levels, and if a physicist says "garvity is a force", of course he means that he chooses to describe it as a force. I don't think we should make life in physics even more difficult by using unsensical linguistic experiments. However, of course, one should be precise, and sometimes a lot of physicists' jargon tends to confusing beginning physics students.

First of all, I think, only within Newtonian physics the notion of force makes sense, since it's a concept based on a picture where instantaneous interactions take place. Today we know that this is an approximation valid for Newtonian mechanics only, which implies that the bodies should move at speeds much less than light and the time it takes for interactions to be transferred from one body to the other via fields is small. In the case of gravity and electromagnetism the speed of signal propagation is ##c##, the vacuum speed of light. Thus the speeds of the particles must be much less than the speed of light.
 
  • Like
Likes Heikki Tuuri
  • #12
does anyone have a citation or something official that says gravity is a force or causes a force... or something to the effect of "the force due to gravity"? I have a side bet that this is true , but I need an official quote. thanks!
 
  • #13
zanick said:
I have a side bet that this is true...
It's neither true nor false. It's a naming convention.
 
  • Like
Likes nasu and jbriggs444
  • #14
Great answer... i understand and appreciate that.
 
  • #15
In Newtonian mechanics gravity is a force , it is the attraction of two objects with mass.
 
  • #16
I think it's interesting that in Newtonian physics in a space far from masses like stars and planets objects move along straight lines at a constant velocity unless acted upon by a force. In making the transition to special relativity these very same constant velocity trajectories become geodesics, extremal paths in space-time. Again, bodies only deviate from them when acted upon by an external force. In passing to general relativity geodesics become quite a bit more complex, and yet bodies still follow geodesics unless acted upon by an external force. Basically, ##F=ma## is alive and well in general relativity though much modified in details of what ##a## is within the theory. In the modern view, as others have said, Newton was able to describe the modifications to geodesics caused by masses by introducing a force, his universal gravitation force we all know and love.
 
  • #17
You mean General Relativity. Free fall, i.e., the motion of a point particle in space time is a force-free motion along geodesics in spacetime. Inertial frames exist only locally.
 

FAQ: Gravity -- a force or a cause of a force?

1. Is gravity a force or a cause of a force?

Gravity is both a force and a cause of a force. It is a fundamental force of nature that causes objects with mass to be attracted to each other. This attraction is what we commonly refer to as gravity.

2. How does gravity work?

Gravity works by exerting a force on objects with mass. This force is proportional to the mass of the objects and the distance between them. The larger the mass and the closer the distance, the stronger the force of gravity.

3. What causes gravity?

Gravity is caused by the curvature of spacetime. Objects with mass cause spacetime to curve, and this curvature is what we experience as gravity. This theory was first proposed by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity.

4. Why do objects fall towards the Earth?

Objects fall towards the Earth because of the force of gravity. The Earth has a large mass, which causes a strong gravitational force. This force pulls objects towards the center of the Earth, causing them to fall.

5. Can gravity be manipulated or controlled?

As of now, we do not have the technology or understanding to manipulate or control gravity. However, scientists are constantly studying and researching ways to harness the power of gravity for space travel and other applications.

Back
Top