The post which you have quoted attempted to answer that question.
The gravitational force acts between masses. It provides the attractive force that is responsible for binding the matter in our galaxy together.
The electromagnetic force acts between charged particles. It can be either attractive or repulsive. It is responsible for many things, including holding solid objects together and, when electrons flow into your speakers, making the voice coils magnetic.
Please note that, when we are dealing with astronomical distances, only the force of gravity is significant.
Is there no electromagnetic force on a large scale? The Earth itself has + and - poles like a permanent magnet. How do we differentiate this from the gravity of Earth? Have you heard of a fellow named Edward Leedskalnin who in the early 20th century emigrated to Florida from Latvia to build a castle for his sweet sixteen? He is responsible for the Coral Castle there. He apparently found a way to harness the magnetic currents flowing throughout the Earth to lift 20 + ton coral blocks hewn from sedimentary bedrock and move them about with ease. The evidence of which is there on site. There are numerous witness accounts. But my point is the magnetic action taking place on non metallic coral.
Discopete, I suppose hydrogen may be considered to be a metal.
Maybe magnetism affects it a little.
And there's a lot of hydrogen floating around.
Maybe magnetism affects it a little.
And there's a lot of hydrogen floating around.
Not on Earth, though. Actually, nowhere is hydrogen a metal, although it can have some properties of it under certain circumstances which I am not able to elaborate on😉
You talk about 'large scale' then mention the electromagnetic field of tiny little planet Earth (which is approximately a magnetic dipole by the way!).
You appear to have no comprehension of what 'large scale' means in terms of cosmology.
The Earth's magnetic field has only a local effect (google 'magnetosphere') and does not extend to cosmological distances.
Okay, I'll concede I'm clued out. Hence my query. So dark matter deals with galaxies interacting as opposed to interaction within a galaxy? Or within a solar system? At what magnitude does dark matter become relevant?
At the scale of galaxies and galactic clusters - see my post #2400 - you do read my posts don't you? 😉
But, not within our solar systems or we see its effect on the perturbation of the orbits of the planets around the Sun.
But, not within our solar systems or we see its effect on the perturbation of the orbits of the planets around the Sun.
Does someone who is clued out arrive at answers by deduction? Surely you jest🙄
Benny Hill made it clear a long time ago what happens when we assume too much🙂
And yes, like a soldier😎
Benny Hill made it clear a long time ago what happens when we assume too much🙂
And yes, like a soldier😎
It's been decades since I opened a text bond, but I thought hydrogen could be a metal because of its electron valence status.
So tiny in small volumes, possibly massive as unilluminated matter in and around galactic groups.
So tiny in small volumes, possibly massive as unilluminated matter in and around galactic groups.
All I know is what I just picked up on Wiki my friend, which is not written in stone.
I mean my friend, Wiki 🙂
I mean my friend, Wiki 🙂
Space and time do not exist in isolation but there are phenomena called space-time. So as time gets longer as we 'feel' it then space follows and gets larger to accommodate the additional time. Or perhaps its vice-versa. Who knows?
The thing that fascinates me was the discovery that the time part of space-time also has quanta. Or perhaps its because space and time are the same thing. Who knows?
One more - it is well understood via GPS and satellites that time gets "slower" where gravity is stronger. Or does space get larger where gravity is stronger?
The thing that fascinates me was the discovery that the time part of space-time also has quanta. Or perhaps its because space and time are the same thing. Who knows?
One more - it is well understood via GPS and satellites that time gets "slower" where gravity is stronger. Or does space get larger where gravity is stronger?
Not enough intensity.
Galu, you read an awful lot of junk literature. Instead, do humanity a favor, start investigating how forces are transmitted in a nonfictional physical sense and how they can be attractive, to explain the embarrassingly popular gravitation. Newton was unable to do that. Everybody parrots what others parrot without thinking and understanding what is being parroted.
@N101N
You need to pass that bong around if we are to have any hope of grasping these hazy concepts you exhale!
You need to pass that bong around if we are to have any hope of grasping these hazy concepts you exhale!
I'll comment on the physics which I can extract from the above quote.
- Newton came up with a mathematical description of the attractive force between any two masses, but could not explain how this force of gravity works.
- Einstein said that gravity was not a force at all, but a consequence of the curvature of spacetime.
- The Standard Model of particle physics attempts to explain how the electromagnetic force and the strong and weak nuclear forces actually work. Just as two little boys can be 'bound' together by exchanging a ball between themselves, sub atomic particles can be bound together by exchanging special 'exchange particles'. These exchange particles, for example the 'gluon' responsible for the stong nuclear force, have been detected. Have gluons actually been detected, and if they have, how?
- Now back to gravity! Gravity is such a weak force compared to the above three forces that we haven't been able to detect its exchange particle - no one has ever detected a 'graviton'!
- Where now for gravity? Einstein's theory of gravity breaks down in extreme conditions like those associated with a black hole. Physicists are actively pursuing a new model of gravity that will tie in with the quantum ideas of the Standard Model - a theory of quantum gravity? Wish I could understand the new mathematical models now being put forward, as described (?) in this video: YouTube
Re: Richard Feynman's analogy in your latest link. If anything, that key in his context should definitely be left alone
. Those two places already have reservations waiting.
The gluon link
Oh, I guess the side bar revolves. It was a quote by him regarding the "Key" of science opening the doors to heaven or hell.
nuff said
Oh, I guess the side bar revolves. It was a quote by him regarding the "Key" of science opening the doors to heaven or hell.
nuff said
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.