Would planets fall out of orbit when gravity has a speed?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of gravity and its speed, particularly in relation to planetary orbits and the implications of relativity. Participants explore whether planets would fall out of orbit if gravity has a finite speed, examining both theoretical and mathematical perspectives.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that gravity has a speed, specifically the speed of light, and that this speed does not cause planets to fall out of orbit due to their free-fall motion.
  • Others propose that gravity could act instantaneously, questioning the validity of measuring its speed and suggesting that such measurements might be based on flawed assumptions.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the existence of a gravitational field without mass, referencing Einstein's derivation of field equations and the implications of mass in relation to gravity.
  • Another participant mentions the need for strong experimental data on gravity's speed and challenges the notion that gravity's finite speed could be reconciled with the movement of celestial bodies.
  • Links to various sources are provided, indicating differing levels of understanding and approaches to the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views regarding the nature of gravity and its speed remain, with some arguing for instantaneous action and others supporting the idea of a finite speed.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on assumptions about the relationship between gravity and mass, and there are unresolved questions regarding the implications of relativity and vector analysis in this context.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring gravitational theory, relativity, and the mathematical modeling of celestial mechanics.

Erribert
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
As I understand it, Newton considered the influence of gravity between two objects to be instantaneous.

Now it would appear that gravity has a speed limit. If the Earth is influenced by the sun from where it was 8 minutes ago, how does the Earth keep up with a traveling sun?

Does relativity and frames of reference play a mathematical role in this? What about simple vector analysis?

Thank you in advance.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Erribert said:
As I understand it, Newton considered the influence of gravity between two objects to be instantaneous.

Now it would appear that gravity has a speed limit. If the Earth is influenced by the sun from where it was 8 minutes ago, how does the Earth keep up with a traveling sun?

Does relativity and frames of reference play a mathematical role in this? What about simple vector analysis?

Thank you in advance.
Gravity has a speed. It is the speed of light, which is fast, but nevertheless a certain finite number. The planets are free falling in space. They basically all fall into the sun, but they are so fast, that they constantly miss it. And this makes the orbits. Not only of planets, but of our satellites as well. It's a bit like jumping over a puddle. If you're fast enough you won't fall into it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Erribert and Fervent Freyja
Gravity has a speed, and planets do not fall out of orbit, so the answer to your question is "no:".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: stefan r and Fervent Freyja
Vanadium 50 said:
Gravity has a speed, and planets do not fall out of orbit, so the answer to your question is "no:".

Very clever. However the correct answer could be that gravity acts instantaneously. Or, maybe you are pulling my leg?

What instruments measure the speed of gravity? Do such instruments have algorithms that are based on finding such speed to be that of light? If so, I would call that unethical science.

To return your answer in kind: the Earth exists so that proves there is a god that travels at the speed of light. Have a go at disproving that theory.

<Moderator's note: Personal comments removed.>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fresh_42 said:
Gravity has a speed. It is the speed of light, which is fast, but nevertheless a certain finite number. The planets are free falling in space. They basically all fall into the sun, but they are so fast, that they constantly miss it. And this makes the orbits. Not only of planets, but of our satellites as well. It's a bit like jumping over a puddle. If you're fast enough you won't fall into it.

So I assume you are using the extraterrestrial fourth dimension, and those pictures of wells around matter. Okay, but isn’t that complete conjecture?

In Einstein’s colleagues derivation of the field equations, their first step was to claim that gravity existed without mass. That is, they arbitrarily set mass to zero. Is there proof that there is a field that could exist in a universe without mass?

Most people think that gravity and mass are related, but not Einstein’s group. Reality is not a set of equations on a blackboard that we can just step into. There is a big difference between a description of a thing and the thing itself. Ever try to step into a map of Argentina so you could be in that reality.

I am just looking for strong experimental data on gravity’s speed. We trust in God, all others must produce data.

Thank you for your answer. I am familiar with the setting you propose. What you left out was that the sun is moving. By the time Pluto gets its gravitational signal, it would seem like the sun is long gone. How is this explained. Simple vector analysis seems to disprove that gravity has a finite speed. But, what do I know. I am a simple biophysicist.

Cheers
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Erribert
Erribert said:
In Einstein’s colleagues derivation of the field equations, their first step was to claim that gravity existed without mass. That is, they arbitrarily set mass to zero.

I have no idea where you are getting this from. This and your posts in other threads indicate that you know a lot less than you think you do about the subjects you are posting from. You really need to build a better understanding.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
9K