Le Sage Gravity - some questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ad_Absurdum
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity
Ad_Absurdum
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
"Le Sage" Gravity - some questions

In "pushing" gravity of the "Le Sage" kind, caused by some type of low mass particles,

1. Would light still be bent by gravity?

2. Would the light be dispersed (each frequency bent to a different extent), thus differentiating it from the bending caused by curved space?Thanks in advance!

:smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Since Le Sage gravity has been falsified already (i.e. shown to be inconsistent with experiment) why would one care? The Wikipedia has some references to the (very early, 17th century) articles when Le Sage gravity was still considered interesting (i.e. it hadn't been falsified yet.) However, I doubt that they knew enough about the properties of light to have a definitive prediction.
 
pervect said:
Since Le Sage gravity has been falsified already (i.e. shown to be inconsistent with experiment) why would one care? The Wikipedia has some references to the (very early, 17th century) articles when Le Sage gravity was still considered interesting (i.e. it hadn't been falsified yet.) However, I doubt that they knew enough about the properties of light to have a definitive prediction.

Would the drag effect that doomed Le Sage gravity still be an issue if instead of the all-pervasive corpuscles he mentions, you had spacetime in the absence of mass be curved in the opposite way that we now assume it is around mass? Then mass would shield it by "uncurving" spacetime. You'd have the same effect as Le Sage but there are no particles pushing to cause drag. It's just the shape of the universe that does the pushing. It would be like spacetime is a plateau above the minimum (zero spacetime curvature) and mass creates valleys in it that can only go as deep as the minimum (a black hole). But that seems to me to be indistinguishable from Einstein's view to me as far as the observed results. Only what would this version say about singularities? They don't have infinite gravitation, but instead have 100% "uncurving".

I'm probably completely off on some obvious thing but I don't know what it is - so don't flame me. I just want to know what's wrong with this idea.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the sudden resurgence in interest in LeSage theory, which has (as I mentioned) been falsified.

Since this is a necropost (reopening a very old post), and we already have a new thread on LeSage gravity under another name, I'm locking this thread.
 

Thread 'Describing the Big Bang'

I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
View full post »
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'

Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'

See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
View full post »

Thread 'A sufficient condition for integrability of equation ##\nabla g=0##'

In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
View full post »

Similar threads

A Is Fatio–Le Sage's theory of gravitation an entropic gravity?
Replies
33
Views
2K
B Does Spacetime Have Physical Existence?
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
B Does Relativity Impact Gravity's Influence on Fast-Moving Objects?
Replies
2
Views
1K
B How exactly does gravity work?
2
Replies
81
Views
9K
I The cause of spacetime and gravity
Replies
3
Views
2K
B Spacetime curvature due to acceleration causing gravity?
Replies
41
Views
5K
B What Causes Mass to Exert Gravitational Pull?
Replies
1
Views
2K
What curves space and bends light: Mass or Gravity?
Replies
22
Views
3K
I Bending of light - caused by gravity or relativity?
Replies
10
Views
2K
A Does Gravity Criticism in Maxwell's Equations Apply to All Gravity-Medium Analogies?
Replies
6
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top