gravity was the same thing as electric field

polishpaddy

In the grand sheme of things. What if gravity was the same thing as electric field and science was wrong?

But, it's not wrong, because they're completely different things. The two might end up being two sides of the one coin, i.e. very related; but, they're certainly not the same force.

Edit: Just to clarify. Some day it might be discovered that gravity and electromagnetism can be unified. This has happened in the past (electric forces were united with magnetic forces, forming electromagnetism; i.e. the two are different manifestations of the same phenomenon). One of the main goals of modern physics is to unify the four fundamental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, weak nuclear and strong nuclear), and we're well on our way to uniting electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force through the electroweak theory. Unifying all four would play a huge part in a "Theory of Everything".

So, basically, it may turn out that gravity and electromagnetism are very closely related, but they're still different forces in that they affect different particles through different means.

And anyway, if science did discover that they were the same thing (to answer your question), science would just adapt to take the new discovery as the best possible means of explaining the phenomenon. Science doesn't claim absolute truth, it's open to change.

Kromdar

so, what if they were? is there a possible link to electric charge and gravity?
has anyone explored this? like if all particles contain some form of charge, that they must have a gravitational field. i dunno how far down the sub-atomic particle scale goes these days, but for every particle there is an oppositely charged particle, [ie. electrons, protons] and when they are broken down further they themselves are oppositely charged, are they not? is it possible that even neutral particles have an opposite in an antimatter state, hence conforming to gravitational forces?

Kromdar

Kromdar wrote: »

so, what if they were? is there a possible link to electric charge and gravity? has anyone explored this?

There isn't one known at the moment (as far as I'm aware). It's one of the main aims of theoretical physics to unite the fundamental forces, so searching for a link between the two would be a top priority.

like if all particles contain some form of charge, that they must have a gravitational field.

Not all particles have an electric charge, only particles which feel the electromagnetic force have an electric charge. For example, neutrons and neutrinos don't carry an electric charge.

There's no link between charge and a gravitational field. Very basically, mass "produces" the gravitational field around a particle.

i dunno how far down the sub-atomic particle scale goes these days, but for every particle there is an oppositely charged particle, [ie. electrons, protons]

It's not that every particle has an associated oppositely charged particle (for example, the neutron doesn't), it's that every particle has an associated anti-matter particle. This particle doesn't have to have an opposite charge (again, take the neutron as an example).

and when they are broken down further they themselves are oppositely charged, are they not?

Well, in some senses. If you break down baryonic and mesonic (hadrons) matter, you'll see that it's made up of quarks. Quarks have one third and two thirds units of electric charge (they also have another "charge" associated with them: their colour). But, you can't break down leptons (electrons, neutrons etc.). The particles composing another particle don't necessarily have to have opposite charge, as long as the net charge is correct. For example, the three quarks making up a proton don't have to have opposite charge to each other, they just have to have a total charge of +1.

is it possible that even neutral particles have an opposite in an antimatter state, hence conforming to gravitational forces?

Every particle has an associated anti-matter particle (although some particles are their own anti-particles). I'm not sure what you mean by saying they conform to gravitational forces?

Professor_Fink

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

There isn't one known at the moment (as far as I'm aware).

There is a very elegant theory which combines the two: Kaluza–Klein theory. The problem is that this is a classical theory, not a quantum theory, and as yet we lack a proper quantum theory of gravity. On the other hand, the electromagnetic interaction was the first to be fully understood quantum mechanically.

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Not all particles have an electric charge, only particles which feel the electromagnetic force have an electric charge. For example, neutrons and neutrinos don't carry an electric charge.

Actually, while neutrons have zero total charge they are composed of charged particles and hence have a small magnetic moment, and so do couple weakly to electromagnetic fields.

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

It's not that every particle has an associated oppositely charged particle (for example, the neutron doesn't), it's that every particle has an associated anti-matter particle. This particle doesn't have to have an opposite charge (again, take the neutron as an example).

Well, the criterion is that the sum of the charges be zero. So many particles are their own anti particle, but these all have charge 0. The neutron is not a fantastic example, as it is composed of charged quarks and the anti-neutron is composd of the relevant anti-quarks, which are indeed oppositely charged. Photons are probably a better example.

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Well, in some senses. If you break down baryonic and mesonic (hadrons) matter, you'll see that it's made up of quarks. Quarks have one third and two thirds units of electric charge (they also have another "charge" associated with them: their colour). But, you can't break down leptons (electrons, neutrons etc.). The particles composing another particle don't necessarily have to have opposite charge, as long as the net charge is correct. For example, the three quarks making up a proton don't have to have opposite charge to each other, they just have to have a total charge of +1.

Well, they can't have opposite charges, since quarks have charge either +2/3 or -1/3, so it is impossible for them to have opposite charges in a baryon or antibaryon. This is only possible in mesons.

Professor_Fink

Kromdar wrote: »

is it possible that even neutral particles have an opposite in an antimatter state, hence conforming to gravitational forces?

I think you might be misunderstanding the nature of gravity. In a sense, this gravitational charge you are looking for is simply energy. All particles have positive energy, and so all are bound by gravity in the same way. Since anti-particles still have positive energy they still gravitate in the usual way.

Professor_Fink

Professor_Fink wrote: »

There is a very elegant theory which combines the two: Kaluza–Klein theory. The problem is that this is a classical theory, not a quantum theory, and as yet we lack a proper quantum theory of gravity. On the other hand, the electromagnetic interaction was the first to be fully understood quantum mechanically.

I've read something about that theory before, but I haven't ever paid it much heed (the book which mentioned it didn't paint it in a great light, so I guess that influenced my thinking about it).

Actually, while neutrons have zero total charge they are composed of charged particles and hence have a small magnetic moment, and so do couple weakly to electromagnetic fields.

Well, the criterion is that the sum of the charges be zero. So many particles are their own anti particle, but these all have charge 0. The neutron is not a fantastic example, as it is composed of charged quarks and the anti-neutron is composd of the relevant anti-quarks, which are indeed oppositely charged. Photons are probably a better example.

Yah, you're right, neutrons aren't the best example. I just wanted to use a relatively simple example which the person posting the question might have heard of (although I'm sure they've heard of a photon).

Well, they can't have opposite charges, since quarks have charge either +2/3 or -1/3, so it is impossible for them to have opposite charges in a baryon or antibaryon. This is only possible in mesons.

Yah, I know. I should have really made that more clear in my previous post (I shouldn't have rushed the post).