Queries: What is Space, Gravity?

[Erasmus7]

Dear all,

Good day. Let me say first up that I am not a scientist, but have a fascination for certain aspects as I read deeper into, for instance, the evolution debate.

I have two queries, both of which came to me in the course of the year.

Forgive me if both my questions below are considered 'old hat' among scientists, but I am curious as to how science might regard them. As far as a Christian context is concerned, I am struck by certain questions which science has yet to answer, chiefly regarding quantum physics, dark matter, and the recent curious anomaly of antimatter - perhaps divine reminders that science and humanism do not hold nearly all the answers, and so to reconsider dogmatic atheism?

My queries, then:

1. First, what is space, whether outer space or the space that surrounds us? If every single atom, electron, subatomic particle and element were removed from 'space' per se, what would remain? Anything at all? Could, then, such 'space' be put under a microscope, electron microscope, etc., and so reveal anything at all? Can, then, the existence of 'space' be empirically proven?

2. Second, I believe that 'time' slows down when it comes under the force of gravity. I have heard, for instance, that at the edge of a black hole time virtually stands still.
Now does it follow that time is a physical entity? In other words, when acted on by the 'force' of gravity, it responds accordingly (which seems bizarre to me). Does it follow that time is a physical force as such? Further, does it follow that the essential substance of time can be proven empirically, can be scientifically analysed?

Thanks and kind regards,
Erasmus

 

[Ophiolite]

Your questions are way above my pay grade, but I'll offer these brief thoughts until a knowledgable person comes along.

You have two questions because you have understood space and time to be distinct phenomena. They are not. For more than a century scientists have recognised the eixstence of spacetime, a fusion of the three dimensions of space with the one dimension of time. I suspect that this renders your two questions, not wrong, but the equivalent of asking "Why is yellow?"

I fear this answer may raise yet more questions, but that's science for you! Try this link as a starting point, or just Google spacetime.

 

[Goatee]

Second question, gravity, depends on how much I have had to drink! Lol

 

[Edison Trent]

1. space is just that, the distance between objects, could be between two things or a trillion things in any direction.

2. Gravity regulates movements and speeds, without gravity in the universe everything would be zipping around at light speed unabated without order and purpose.

 

[Edison Trent]

time and distance are basically reasoning measurements for objects in the physical universe.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Space and time are the arena in which events happens. The counterintuitive conclusion from general relativity is that the arena itself is affected by the material content it contains.

Space and time are not material, they are not made of matter. Differences in space and time are real physical properties (distance and duration) that can be measured.

 

[Michael]

My queries, then:

1. First, what is space, whether outer space or the space that surrounds us? If every single atom, electron, subatomic particle and element were removed from 'space' per se, what would remain? Anything at all? Could, then, such 'space' be put under a microscope, electron microscope, etc., and so reveal anything at all? Can, then, the existence of 'space' be empirically proven?

"Space" as it actually exists is full of kinetic energy in the form of photons passing through, neutrinos passing through, carrier particles for EM fields and such. It's anything but "empty". In theory, if you could actually remove every form of kinetic energy from space, it would simply be pure emptiness. In reality however, that's simply not possible to do.

2. Second, I believe that 'time' slows down when it comes under the force of gravity. I have heard, for instance, that at the edge of a black hole time virtually stands still.
Now does it follow that time is a physical entity? In other words, when acted on by the 'force' of gravity, it responds accordingly (which seems bizarre to me). Does it follow that time is a physical force as such? Further, does it follow that the essential substance of time can be proven empirically, can be scientifically analysed?

That depends on which scientific theory you're using to describe gravity. The definition that you mentioned (spacetime forms of gravity) is related to GR theory which essentially treats gravity as geometric feature that is created by mass/energy, like hills and valleys. GR theory connects the concept of space and time into "spacetime". The famous 2D analogy that is used in GR is to imagine a bowling ball sitting on a rubber sheet. The ball creates a geometric indentation in the sheet. The curvature in the sheet in that analogy is "spacetime". One's location and speed in GR theory has an effect on the passage of time.

In contrast to GR theory, QM and Newton's definition of gravity tend to treat gravity as a "force". In QM there's a hypothetical carrier particle of gravity called a "graviton" which produces that force.

QM works really well to describe events in a 'non-empty" space at the smallest possible scales, whereas GR theory seems to work best to explain events at the largest possible scales. They don't match up with each other, so there's a "tension" of sorts between GR and QM, particularly as QM attempts to describe macro-sized events. GR does a better job at larger scales. Likewise at the smallest possible scales, QM does a better job describing events which we observe in the lab. Each has their place in physics today.

There's a "hope" in physics that one day we will figure out a "theory of everything" which ties the four known forces of nature together into a single cohesive theory, and explains how those forces are all interrelated. Such theories are typically QM based but to date, there isn't an "agreed upon" version of such a theory.

FYI, I would describe "time" as being a way to describe the movement of objects and photons and such.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Now that I have more time, I'll take a stab at your specific questions.

1. First, what is space, whether outer space or the space that surrounds us? If every single atom, electron, subatomic particle and element were removed from 'space' per se, what would remain? Anything at all?

If you have a box, and take all the matter out of it, there will be nothing(*) material inside. There would be a perfect(*) vacuum.

If the box were four feet in length, the four feet measures the physical extension in space of the object. It's not that the box 'contains' space, like a bucket contains water. Distances are relations in space, just as durations are relations in time.

(*) Due to quantum mechanics, there are virtual particles popping in and out of existence everywhere, including inside our box.

Could, then, such 'space' be put under a microscope, electron microscope, etc., and so reveal anything at all? Can, then, the existence of 'space' be empirically proven?

Since space is not a material object, we can't 'see' it. But if we recognize that our left ear and our right ear are not in the exact same place, we recognize the reality of spatial relations as a part of our physical reality.

2. Second, I believe that 'time' slows down when it comes under the force of gravity. I have heard, for instance, that at the edge of a black hole time virtually stands still.

Observers in different frames of reference will measure time and space differently. Compared to an observer far away from a black hole, the clock of a person close to the black hole would appear to 'tick' very slowly. And vice versa, the person near the black hole would see the other person's clock running more rapidly. It is not the case that gravity is acting on time the way that gravity acts on a rock.

Now does it follow that time is a physical entity?

It depends on what you mean by physical. Time is not material -- it is not made of matter. But like space, time is a part of our physical reality. I would say it is physical.

Does it follow that time is a physical force as such?

Force has a specific meaning in physics. Time is definitely not a force.

Further, does it follow that the essential substance of time can be proven empirically, can be scientifically analysed?

Time is not a substance in the usual sense. It is not material. Like distances, durations can be measured empirically. Distances are extensions in space. Durations are extensions in time.

 

[Anguspure]

Dear all,

Good day. Let me say first up that I am not a scientist, but have a fascination for certain aspects as I read deeper into, for instance, the evolution debate.

I have two queries, both of which came to me in the course of the year.

Forgive me if both my questions below are considered 'old hat' among scientists, but I am curious as to how science might regard them. As far as a Christian context is concerned, I am struck by certain questions which science has yet to answer, chiefly regarding quantum physics, dark matter, and the recent curious anomaly of antimatter - perhaps divine reminders that science and humanism do not hold nearly all the answers, and so to reconsider dogmatic atheism?

My queries, then:

1. First, what is space, whether outer space or the space that surrounds us? If every single atom, electron, subatomic particle and element were removed from 'space' per se, what would remain? Anything at all? Could, then, such 'space' be put under a microscope, electron microscope, etc., and so reveal anything at all? Can, then, the existence of 'space' be empirically proven?

2. Second, I believe that 'time' slows down when it comes under the force of gravity. I have heard, for instance, that at the edge of a black hole time virtually stands still.
Now does it follow that time is a physical entity? In other words, when acted on by the 'force' of gravity, it responds accordingly (which seems bizarre to me). Does it follow that time is a physical force as such? Further, does it follow that the essential substance of time can be proven empirically, can be scientifically analysed?

Thanks and kind regards,
Erasmus

Is Gravity metaphysical (in the sense of the Universe that we live in)? I have read that because of problems with finding the missing mass that would account for the stronger than expected gravity of the universe; it has been hypothesized that the mass is another parallel universe and the gravity experienced is trans-dimensional.

 

[loveofourlord]

I had a weird thought a few years ago on gravity and matter being related. The thought was that matter is just condensed space, and gravity was the warping that condensing space creates.

The example I've heard of imagining gravity on a 2d plane, is a trampoline with a bowling ball, the bowling ball is say the sun, and the trampoline is space, and the warping of the trampoline the bowling ball causes is gravity.

Well my thought was, you take the trampoline, and twist the middle into a small ball, you get a simular effect.