Is Gravity Magnetic Attraction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom Naprstek
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Attraction Gravity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the idea of whether gravity could be explained by magnetic attraction, particularly in relation to the net charge of the Earth. It highlights that while both forces exhibit attraction, they fundamentally differ in their properties, such as the absence of magnetic monopoles and the nature of their respective fields. Participants emphasize that gravitational fields have sources (mass), while magnetic fields do not, leading to distinct behaviors in their mathematical descriptions. The conversation suggests that while the concept is intriguing, the differences in the underlying physics make the hypothesis unlikely. A deeper understanding of these forces requires more advanced study in physics.
Tom Naprstek
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm a first year physics student, so I don't know too much about advanced physics, though I try to read a lot of physics books, mainly on Grand Unified Theories and such. Yesterday when I was in my physics class, a thought came to me. Could gravity be completely be explained by magnetism? What I mean is, could the net charge of the entire planet account for gravity? And since objects (like people, animals, etc.) all experience the same basic attraction since we are all so small (and therefore a small net charge) in comparison to the Earth?

I tried to look some of this up on the Internet, but I couldn't really find anything that made sense to me. Could someone explain to me if this idea has been tried before (I assume that it has been), and if this is possible? And if so, could it help with Quantum Gravity, as in both cases magnetic attraction would be acceptable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tom Naprstek said:
the net charge of the entire planet account for gravity? And since objects (like people, animals, etc.) all experience the same basic attraction since we are all so small (and therefore a small net charge) in comparison to the Earth?
Well, then we should have repulsion also.
 
If you look at the the magnetic component of the Lorentz force you'll see that it's different from the gravitational force and it depends on the velocity of the particle. So, the answer is no.
 
Tom Naprstek said:
I'm a first year physics student, so I don't know too much about advanced physics, though I try to read a lot of physics books, mainly on Grand Unified Theories and such. Yesterday when I was in my physics class, a thought came to me. Could gravity be completely be explained by magnetism? What I mean is, could the net charge of the entire planet account for gravity? And since objects (like people, animals, etc.) all experience the same basic attraction since we are all so small (and therefore a small net charge) in comparison to the Earth?

I tried to look some of this up on the Internet, but I couldn't really find anything that made sense to me. Could someone explain to me if this idea has been tried before (I assume that it has been), and if this is possible? And if so, could it help with Quantum Gravity, as in both cases magnetic attraction would be acceptable?

You need to reconcile these before you make up such a hypothesis:

1. There are no "sources" of magnetic field, i.e. no monopoles. But we have sources of gravitational field (objects with masses).

2. Because of #1, you can have a non-zero divergence of gravitational field (i.e. you can have a Gauss's law). You don't have that with magnetic field.

3. Try to find the curl of gravitational field and then do the same with magnetic field. Do you get the same type of result?

There are many things that may look "similar" when looking from "very far", but the DETAILS are usually what kill these similarities. This is before delving into the more exotic aspect of quantum field theory.

Zz.
 
Thanks everyone, I just wanted to know a bit about it. Looks like I'll have to wait a few more years before I'll really be able to understand this well though.
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Back
Top