- #1
mikejp56
- 6
- 0
I am an avid reader of physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics; the entire genre. I have 2 physics questions:
1) If I understand properly, isn't gravity the effect of a massive object warping the fabric of space-time? If this is correct, then is gravity not really a 'force', but a manifestation of that warping?
If these are true, then isn't trying to equate gravity with the other 3 forces of nature; the strong, weak, and electromagnetic, like trying to merge apples and oranges?
2) I have seen Professor Michio Kaku explain that the infinity problem crops up when a point particle is represented as having no radius; again if I understand properly. Would this problem be cleared up if instead of using 0 for the radius of a particle, the Planck length was used instead?
I only have math up to mid college level, so tensors and the higher level stuff have eluded me.
Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
Thanks,
Mike
1) If I understand properly, isn't gravity the effect of a massive object warping the fabric of space-time? If this is correct, then is gravity not really a 'force', but a manifestation of that warping?
If these are true, then isn't trying to equate gravity with the other 3 forces of nature; the strong, weak, and electromagnetic, like trying to merge apples and oranges?
2) I have seen Professor Michio Kaku explain that the infinity problem crops up when a point particle is represented as having no radius; again if I understand properly. Would this problem be cleared up if instead of using 0 for the radius of a particle, the Planck length was used instead?
I only have math up to mid college level, so tensors and the higher level stuff have eluded me.
Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
Thanks,
Mike