neutrinos: three types (at least two and probably all three with small masses).charged leptons: electrons, muons, taus.quarks: top, bottom, charm, strange, up, down.photons, gluons, gravitons (the latter presumed to exist).What is the true statement? Well, here is a list of the elementary particles that we know about so far. What about the Higgs field being the source for all mass in the universe? This statement, though you will often find it in the press or in glib articles written for the public, is false. We say “gravity is a universal force” (here the term is not referring not to the universe but to the notion of universality - of complete generality.) And all objects, not matter what they are made from or how they are moving from your point of view, have energy - so everything in the universe exerts a gravitational effect on everything else. (And it is why gravitational waves - waves in space and time, massless just like light - can be formed by objects that are orbiting one another.) Simply put, the Einsteinian view of gravity (now reasonably well confirmed by experiment) differs significantly from the Newtonian view, and in particular, it is not mass but energy and momentum which are primary. This is why Einstein’s version of gravity even pulls on things like light, which is made from photons that have no mass at all. Since planets, moons, and artificial satellites all move with velocities well below 0.1% of c relative to each other and to the sun, the gravitational forces between them are proportional toĪnd since c is a constant, for such objects Einstein’s law of gravity and Newton’s law of gravity are completely consistent the force law is proportional to the product of the energies and to the product of the masses, because the two are proportional to one another.īut for objects that have high speeds relative to one another, or for objects subject to extremely strong gravitational pulls (which will quickly develop high speeds if they don’t have them already), the Einsteinian law of gravity involves a complicated combination of momentum and energy, in which mass does not explicitly appear. E 2 ≈ (M c 2) 2 (i.e., E ≈ M c 2 for slow objects).
#Pulsar lost colony carrier Pc
How are these two statements, the Newtonian and the Einsteinian, consistent? They are consistent because Einstein and his followers established that for any ordinary object, the relation between its energy E, momentum p and mass M isįor a slow-moving object, p ≈ Mv (where v is the object’s velocity) and pc ≈ Mvc is much smaller than Mc 2. their speed relative to one another is much less than c, the speed of light) and have energy E 1 and E 2, the gravitational force between them has a strength proportional to the product E 1 E 2.
It turns out that Newton’s law needs to be revised: the Einsteinian statement of the law is (roughly) that for two objects that are slow-moving (i.e. When you first learn about gravity in school, you learn Newton’s law: that the force of gravity between two objects, one of mass M 1 and one of mass M 2, has a strength proportional to the product M 1 M 2.īut that was true before Einstein. Now let me explain these corrections one by one.
0 kommentar(er)
