# Gravity.. Wave or Messenger Particle?

alex
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 33
Credit: 7,515
RAC: 0
Topic 188805

Is gravity a wave effect, or is it the result of gravitrons?

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### Gravity.. Wave or Messenger Particle?

Gravity waves are the equivalent to sound waves in air. If a balloon pops in the far distance we can hear it due to the motion of the air rippling away from the point of burst. But only to a certain distance. Gravity waves work on the same principle. If a star goes supernova the dark energy within the surrounding space will carry the gravity ripply outwards. Dark energy is the medium for gravity waves as air is for sound. IMHO

debugas
Joined: 11 Nov 04
Posts: 170
Credit: 77,331
RAC: 0

### > Gravity waves are the

Message 9734 in response to message 9733

> Gravity waves are the equivalent to sound waves in air.

I can't agree. With sound waves when wind is blowing the sound is carried by the air so the speed of sound is effected by the wind speed. Hence the different Doppler effect formulas for sound and light. I don't think dark energy for gravity waves is what the air is for sound waves. To say true i don't know what causes ripples in curved space-time to propogate and what is the speed of that propogation

As to the alex question - the gravitational waves we try to detect they are the effect of curving space-time and not gravitons.
Gravity caused by Moon is easily observed even with naked eye - tidal forces. What we try to observe with E@H are ripples in curved space-time

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### Scientists are just now

Scientists are just now discovering (or soon will) that gravity is caused by the inward absorbtion of dark energy. Over time (GREAT lengths of time) this causes a lower barametric pressure of dark energy in vast regions of the universe where there is a larger accumulation of matter. So, yes, gravity waves are effectively waves of lower baremetric pressure of dark energy abruptly changed in a region of space, such as a collapsing black whole. True as the wind speed has a doppler effect on sound, dark energy speed has the same effect, BUT, the effect is SO minute that it can hardly be detected in our region of space. Scientest can see back into time with the hubble telescope and observe this effect.. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/constant_changing_010815.html

IMHO :-)

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

If you can get past Einsteins theory of gravity wells and replce it with the term 'lower barometric pressure of dark energy' (that is constantly being consumed at the LOWEST atomic level) it ALL falls into perfect place.

IMHO :-)

gravywavy
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 392
Credit: 68,962
RAC: 0

### Is light a wave effect, or

Is light a wave effect, or photons?

If you have two static electric charges there is a force between them.

This force is not a wave.

Before photons were thought of, the force was simply (!?) described as a field, a sort of action at a distance that electric charges could produce.

It can be explained as the interchange of 'virtual photons' between the two charges.

Light waves, and other electromagnetic waves, can be xplained either as waves in the lectromagnetic fields, or as the interchange of real photons which carry the energy and momentum of the 'wave'

The difference between a real photon and a virtual one is an obscure quantum mechanical point, but the essential things to know is that they are related to each other mathematically, so that in many respects they behave in the same ways.

Is gravity a wave effect, or gravitons?

Now, gravity. Two masses atract each other. This can be explained in terms of the intrchange of virtual gravitons, though we are not anywhere near a proper quantum mechanical understanding of gravity yet the basic scheme is there.

Or it can be explained as a force produced by a gravitational field (Newton).
Or it can be explained as a warping of spacetime (Einstein).

Gravity waves could also be explained as an interchange of real gravitons, carrying the energy and momentum of the wave, or as moving ripples in the shape of spacetime.

But the best mathematical description we have of electrodynamics (light & electric charges) is neither from photons nor from waves, but from a complicated theory called quantum electrodynamics or QED. It turns out that the wave/field theory is a simplified approximation to QED in some circumstances, and photons are a simplified approcximation to QED in some other circumstances. Wave/particle duality arises because in different situations one set of approximations makes more sense than the other.

The best theory of gravity would be one that in some circumstances approximated to the graviton approach, while in other circumstances General Relativity was a good approximation to it. We don't have that theory yet; so far at large scales General Relativity is the best we have, and Hawking has some good approaches (*) to quantum gravity and gravitons at small scale. But by analogy to how things got resolved in QED, we'd expect a more comprehensive Quantum Theory of Gravity to underlie both General Relativity and Gravitons. In which case the answer would be that gravity was never really gravitons, or a wave effect, but that both of those were simplifications of the the truer picture.

Or a simpler answer still: "both, but only approximately"

(*) a technical term meaning its too complicated for me to have any meaningful understanding or any meaningful opinion about whther he is right or not

~~gravywavy

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### IMHO,,,, Einsteins theory of

IMHO,,,, Einsteins theory of relativity is correct over the graviton theory, but for the wrong reason. It is perfectly clear in my mind but is hard to describe in words. I feel that dark energy is the fuel for matter as we know it. Imagine a LARGE stadium where the air is PERFECTLY calm with boyant ballons suspended throughout. Now imagine sucking out the air at any point within this stadium (a single peice of matter as we know it). Over time the balloons would start to gravitate (pardon the pun) to the point in which the air was being sucked out. Why? because the air surrounding the point of exit has a lower barametric pressure and the surrounding air compensates by equalizing the pressure. If you have multiple points of exits they would, over time tend to gravitate together. This is what matter as we know it does. Over time this consumption process brings other consupmtion processes(matter as we know it) together on a very large scale (planets, stars, etc..). The surrounding space in closest proximity to these large collections of matter has lower and lower barametric pressure of dark energy and equalization is constantly trying to be reached. This is what gravity is. The constant equalization of dark energy within the proxmity of matter. You must look at the LARGE scale of the universe along with the smallest. Water sucked down a drain causes a spiral effect just as does the consumption of dark energy. You can see it on a large scale by looking at the spiral galaxies. Everywhere you read about Einsteins 'Gravity Wells' can be replaced with the term 'lower barametric pressure of dark energy' and the theory fits. Whew! I hope this helps...

Again, In My Humble opinion! ;-)

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### I know.. The realy BIG

I know.. The realy BIG question is where does this energy go after being consumed at the lowest level? THAT IS the question! I suspect that it may be converted to another form of energy that shoots out to other parts of the universe unimpeeded (nutrinos and such??) Perhaps over time all dark energy in our piece of the universe will eventually be exausted thus stopping the conversion process and ending matter as we know it?? Hmmmmmm. :-)

Oliver
Joined: 24 Feb 05
Posts: 56
Credit: 129,576
RAC: 0

### Perhaps over time all dark

Message 9740 in response to message 9739

Perhaps over time all dark energy
> in our piece of the universe will eventually be exausted thus stopping the
> conversion process and ending matter as we know it?? Hmmmmmm. :-)
>
I`m sorry, but I have the feeling that you`re stuck in your theory about dark energy. Why don`t you just postulate: Look at me, I`ve found the answer to everything, but nobody listens to me.
My advice: take a good book about cosmology, practise some maths and then listen to the guys who have a Ph.D.
And then think over this topic again. And if you don´t understand something, then ASK.

Es gr

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### > Look at me, I`ve found the

> Look at me, I`ve found the answer to everything, but nobody listens to me.

Yes, Unfortunately it's the story of my life! LOL! True, I do not have the physics background to mathematically prove my theory but it does make sense if you think about it long enough. It might not even be dark energy. It very well could be some other 'thing' being consumed at the subatomic level. Someday,,, Someday,,, I will be proven correct ;-)

Mr Gravity
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 2,578,691
RAC: 0

### Thank you Prof. Erik

Thank you Prof. Erik Verlinde!!!!!!  I knew I was right.  You just quantified it for me!!

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.02269v2.pdf