Why is gravity interpreted as a space time distortion?

Why is gravity interpreted as a space-time distortion? ”

The reason why gravity can be regarded as a distortion of space-time is based on the fact that the acceleration of an object moving in a gravitational field has nothing to do with the object's own properties. In this way, as long as any object is in the same gravitational field, their motion must be the same; In this way, as long as we know how space-time is curved, the short-range line in space-time (or in the special case of straight space-time, a straight line) is determined, and any object moves along this line; Thus, the effect of gravity is equivalent to the curvature of space-time.

In short, the acceleration of an object is always closely related to the mass of the object, and the other element that causes acceleration - the source of force, only gravity is also derived from mass, and the other three fundamental forces are derived from other properties (electricity, color, taste), which is the key point that gravity is different from the other three forces, and it is also the fundamental reason why only gravity can be equivalent to the curvature of space-time.

And how can gravity be explained? ”

Gravity is a minor auxiliary concept, in fact, there is no unified and rigorous definition, I personally think the following definition is best: gravity vector = gravitational vector + centrifugal force vector. Without centrifugal force, gravity would be exactly the same as gravitational force, so it can be said that the difference between the two is whether the object under study participates in a circular motion or not, and if it participates, the two should be different.

The definition of gravity should be consistent and should not be limited to the rotation of the Earth.

I would like to define gravity in this way: gravity is related to a frame of reference (unlike gravity, which is only related to spacing and mass), and the gravity of the object under study should be the force that is equivalent to the equilibrium external force that must be exerted to keep it at rest in order to remain at rest, assuming that it is stationary in the chosen frame of reference and keeping it at a distance of the actual distance between the two objects. For example, if the gravity of an object in an artificial satellite is selected as the reference frame, it can be stationary without an external force to balance the object, so its gravity is 0 at this time; If the ground is used as a frame of reference, then it should be assumed that the object is decelerated to a synchronization with the ground, but the orbital radius is constant, and in order for it to remain stationary, an external force must be applied, and the reverse equivalent force of this force is the gravitational force of the object in the satellite as considered in the terrestrial system.

There is an agreed component to what gravity is, but there is also the question of logical consistency. The above definitions are just what I admire, note that there are other definitions. Since the definitions are not uniform, which can sometimes cause confusion, it is advisable to completely abandon the unimportant concept of gravity at this time and describe the problem only in terms of gravitational and centrifugal or centripetal forces.

If an object is gravitationally pulled to the earth's surface, shouldn't it be weightless after it stops moving? ”

Why should I be weightless? I can't understand your logical ......Or maybe it's because of the confusion I mentioned earlier about your concept ......of gravityPlease be clear.

A brief history of natural life in the universe, your popular science primer丨Produced by scientific sound, it must be a high-quality product.

If you don't study physics, you can understand gravity according to classical mechanics.

Everything has a gravitational force, and the magnitude of the gravitational force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the mass of the matter itself. Gravitational waves are manifestations of gravitational force.

Gravity is neither caused by space distortion nor by electromagnetic forces. The gravitational force is caused by the directional motion of the space field quanta, and the gravitational field can also be said to be the space inertial field, and I call the gravitational field the gravitational field. In fact, there are still deviations in human understanding of forces, whether it is strong or weak nuclear force, electromagnetic force, or gravitational force.

It is true that no one has seen what the quantum of space field is, some people say that it is a metal hydrogen ion, some say it is a neutrino, some say it is an electron, some say it is a photon, some say it is an electric particle, a magnetic particle, some say it is a graviton, an aether early or a heavy particle, and so on. But there is a certain truth to it when you force it to understand, and in any case, I think it is much better than space warp, and it is much more real and believable.

The magnetic force should correspond to the gravitational line of a coincidental vertical cover seed force, gravity is of magnitude, and has correspondence, so I am used to calling it the corresponding gravitational force.

Your question, which is completely correct, is the magnetism of the object itself.

I also think that space-time does not distort and does not fold. Gravitational force arises from the "electromagnetic field" created by the movement or function of an object.

The gravitational force is neutral infinitesimal after the equilibrium of various forces (electromagnetic, nuclear forces)!

All the existence of space-time, including the universe itself, is a spiral circular moving body of different levels. The spiral motion will inevitably disturb the surrounding aura to produce a spiral potential energy effect field, and this spiral potential energy effect is formed into what we call "gravitational force". Although the gravitational force is very weak, if we approach or intervene in its "aura", it will inevitably be invisibly affected by the gravitational effect produced by the spiral potential energy of its "aura".

Since the intervener is also a spiral moving body, if it is similar to the main body of the intervening aura, the qi will be the same, and the sound ratio will correspond, which will inevitably produce the phenomenon of filial piety and resonance at the same frequency, so the gravitational induction is greater, and the corresponding impact is also greater!

To sum up, gravity is not caused by the distortion of space-time, nor is it caused by the magnetism of objects, but by the potential energy effect of the spiral cyclic motion of all beings in space-time! The magnetic field gravitational force is only a spiral moving body with the characteristics of yin and yang, because of the role of yin and yang properties in the potential energy effect of gravitational motion, the same sex repels each other, and the opposite sex attracts.

The gravitational force arises because matter absorbs the chaotic photons in the chaotic field existing in space, so that the chaotic field is transformed into a gravitational field, and the chaotic photons are the gravitons that people have been looking for.

Gravitational force is the influence between things. It is the inherent force of the cosmic space force to all things. This force is balanced. However, due to the different masses of various objects, such as the size and mass of the planets, the forces are also different.

interact with each other in a certain space. The bright freshness that has a big impact and is small.

The sun affects eight other planets. So follow the sun and run.

<> it is actually mass that causes space-time distortions, and space-time distortions and gravitational forces are equivalent. There is no contradiction between space-time curvature and gravitons.

The geometric distortion of space-time and gravity are the same concept, and they both describe the same physical phenomenon. And the root cause of this space-time distortion is quality. The nature of mass has not been clarified so far, and the closest theory to revealing the nature of mass is the Higgs boson, which is obtained by fermions interacting with the Higgs boson.

But this mechanism does not explain the source of the gravitational pull (or space-time warp) caused by mass, so why mass can cause space-time warp remains a mystery. Einstein only logically derived the equivalence of gravity and space-time geometric distortion through the field equation through macroscopic thought experiments and the deduction of mathematical principles, but still did not explain the nature of space-time distortion caused by mass.

Human beings' lack of understanding of the nature of mass is manifested in the equivalence of passive gravitational mass and inertial mass. Albert Einstein said, "The reason why the passive gravitational mass is equal to the inertial mass remains a mystery".

Although inertial mass, passive gravitational mass, and active gravitational mass are conceptually distinct, no experiment has been able to unequivocally prove any difference between them. In classical mechanics, Newton's third law implies that the active and passive gravitational masses must always be the same (or at least proportional), but classical theory does not provide a compelling reason why the gravitational mass must be equal to the inertial mass. It really is only an empirical fact.

Einstein's theory of general relativity is based on the assumption of equivalence between inertial mass and passive gravitational mass, and no experiment has been able to detect differences between them. In Einstein's general theory of relativity, there is no way to even define the mass of a system, precisely because the energy of gravity is not included in the energy-momentum tensor of the field equation of general relativity.

Personally, I think that based on the mass-energy equation, the equivalence of mass and energy, and the equivalence of gravity and space-time geometry, we can find a logical clue that it is likely that mass is a space-time curled up in a tiny scale. If we think of space-time as a piece of cloth, then energy is the fold of the cloth (which is in line with Einstein's suggestion that gravity is a geometrical distortion of space-time), and mass is the result of the strong distortion of the "cloth" of space-time on a tiny scale, like a "knot" tied on the "cloth". As a result, mass can be formed into energy (mass-energy equation) under certain excitation conditions, and can also be aggregated into large "knots" (celestial bodies and black holes) under certain conditions, and these "knots" are continuous with the surrounding space-time geometry, so they will inevitably produce a gradient of curvature (gradual curvature) around the "knot", which is the extended gravitational force generated by mass.

Not contradictory. 1.The graviton does not contradict the curved space-time view of general relativity.

2.It is now generally accepted that curved space-time is a way of describing the gravitational field, not the only way.

There is no contradiction because they do not describe the same thing, one refers to the expansion of space and the other refers to four-dimensional space, so there is no disagreement.

I feel that since these two theories can be studied, then these two theories are not contradictory.

Upstairs simply didn't answer the question. People say that gravity is not a force, and then ask why unity. But you don't have gravity as a force. It's like I say I'm going to eat and then I'm going to do something. You and I, strictly speaking, I've eaten. It's just nonsense.

Let me start by stating that this is not a standard answer, but it may solve some of the questioner's doubts:

The gravitational force you are talking about is not a force, perhaps it is influenced by two things: 1) the two-dimensional simulation of gravity that causes the cloth to sink when a ball is placed on a taut cloth. 2) The problem of translation.

Explanation 1: In fact, there are scientists who oppose the use of this model to explain gravity, but this will mislead many people. It's just a metaphor, it's not true, and it's most accurate to say mathematically.

Explanation 2): The original English text is called interaction. Translated as force, perhaps, to make it simpler.

Obviously, gravity is also an interaction.

More detailed explanation: In fact, when Einstein proposed the general theory of relativity, there was no sentence in the original text that gravity is not a force. It is expressed that the curvature of space-time is only a geometric effect of gravity.

In fact, the electromagnetic force can also express its geometric effect, but this needs to take into account the charge-to-mass ratio (which is not discussed here). So why do scientists want to unify gravity? Because the other three forces interact with each other by exchanging particles.

For example, the electromagnetic force is the exchange of photons. Then gravity has so far not found what particles to exchange. So the existence of gravitons is assumed.

The meaning of unity is that the universe can be explained with a single set of theories. And the macro and micro are just artificial regulations.

There is no clear division in nature, so the truth of the universe should be unified rather than separated.

Gravitational force is not strictly a force, it is caused by the curvature of space-time, and in a flat space-time, the natural state of an object (when not subjected to force) is a stationary or uniform linear motion, but in a curved space-time, the natural state appears different.

If you look at it from the perspective of flat space-time, it will be regarded as a change in the motion state of the object, and the force is the basis for the change in the motion state, so it is a force.

However, from the perspective of curved space-time, the falling of objects is the natural state of objects, and we living in the three-dimensional world cannot observe the bending of space-time, so we regard gravity as a force, 1, gravity is a force. It can cause space-time to bend. ,0,

It is not "space-time curvature produces gravity", but "space-time curvature is the space-time type description of the space-time position where the mass is located", in other words, space-time curvature is the gravitational field described in the way of space-time position.

The relationship between planets and moons expressed in the space-time positional pattern.

The curvature of space-time shown in the picture is reduced dimensionally and abstract, and it expresses the tightened four-dimensional space-time in the form of a two-dimensional membrane.

The curvature of space-time is represented in an orientation perpendicular to the plane of the membrane.

Note that this curvature is a numerical value and is a scalar quantity.

It is not a vector that can be expressed in directions, although it appears to be perpendicular to the direction of a known dimension.

Now do you understand? Some popular science works often interpret the above ** as "behaving like an object in the earth's gravitational field", just to help readers understand the physical impact of this diagram on real objects. Actually, this is wrong.

It is true that objects have a tendency to fall in the direction of greater curvature in curved space-time, but by no means because that direction appears to be "downward", let alone that there is a "downward" in space-time (the universe) that is superior to other directions.