is it possible that gravity is actually just electromagnetism?

No.

nope

>>730178030
Thats not how that works. Google "fundamental forces of the universe"

>>730178030
Is it possible you're actually just a retard?

>>730178030
didn't read because of pic, erth is flat

If this were possible than we could create grav plating on the I.S.S. using just electro magnets, and its not.

>>730178030
its much simpler than that.

the earth is flat and stationary.

there is buoyancy and density depending on the surrounding medium on the order of electromagnetic forces that make mass.

gravity is just a concept to explain heliocentric theory.

>>730178432
/thread

>>730178030
what if electromagnetism is just a category of gravity?

>>730178030
Not only is gravity not electromagnetism, but electromagnetism shares more in common with the other forces. Gravity is the odd one out.

If one were to set an object that was so dense it would consume all matter in the universe on the opposite side of the universe in relation to earth, would the earth start moving toward it as soon as the massive object was introduced into our universe?

>>730178030
no no

>>730178827
yes

>>730178432
But pic is flat.

>>730178030
Its a natural phenomena. Anything with mass will attract another thing with mass.

I have mass.

You have mass.

If we were in interstellar space away from the influence of other planets, you and I would be slung together by our masses. Its how things work.

>>730178030
Gravity concerns interactions between objects with mass whereas electromagnetism concerns charges. It is true that at very special conditions they may behave similarly so that you can draw a parallel with them but you have to keep in mind that they deal with different intrinsic characteristics of a object.

>>730178827
No. Gravity propagates at the speed of light.

>>730179268
y tho

>>730179037
you can definitely see that it's trying to imply that the earth is not flat

gravity is the effect of the displacement of spacetime. you have an object taking up room in space, and depending on how much spacetime is displaced, an equal and opposite force pushes back onto the object

You are an embarrassment to yourself, your family, and your nation.
You should kill yourself in your shame for asking such a question.

>>730179354
Why is the speed of light (or "c", whatever) so limiting in the universe? I understand that if you travel beyond that speed you can basically go back in time and that breaks the laws of physics, but doesn't that mean that the laws of physics are flawed? How can we tiny humans dictate a limiting speed for the universe?

>>730179346
Yeah and what IS mass? It's energy temporarily locked in such a pattern that it becomes a "unit" of mass, but that mass can be converted back into energy. All of the forces are fundamentally linked and simply variations of spacetime itself.

>>730179857
You really want to fuck with your brain, photons don't experience the passage of time. It stands still for them. Finger that one out

>>730179857
Because you're a fucking cunt.

How can gravity be real when your eyes aren't real?

>>730179857
We don't dictate the speed limit. It's simply that we have found no evidence of anything that moves faster than that limit. In theory, there MIGHT be ways around that speed limit, but we have yet to prove that it's possible.

>>730179857
It's a geodesic. Just like the smallest path in a sphere is an segment of a circle. in spacetime, it is a light path. As far as we have been using these laws, they never have broken. Eventually, if it happens that we find some error we would simply rewrite the laws of physics. Just like we did in the transition from classical to modern mechanics

>>730178030
At the planck scale, they're all the same

>>730178030
not really no. the mind fuckery comes from matter waves causing space/time to warp or spiral. you ever get your noodle wrapped around that one and there's no coming back to the mortal plane chummies.

>>730180244
I'm not saying that they aren't linked. Gravity doesn't equal Electromagnetism for the same reason an apple doesn't equal a banana: by definition. However, if you really want to mix mass and charge together, you would have to change the axioms that were already established.
Also saying that mass is energy in a certain way doesn't justify anything. For that matter, what would be energy then? It's just a concept that we made up to understand nature, just like mass and charge.

Magnets...who fucking knows how they work?

>>730181130
Maxwell

>>730179857

Things don't move at the speed of light, light has no mass so it moves at the speed of causality. Literally the fastest speed at which something can change in space, which is why you can't go faster than that. To go faster that that, you have to warp through space itself.

>>730179469

it's not matter attracting matter directly, matter displaces space/time and this causes objects that are smaller to "fall" to the larger one

this is an observed constant in the universe, there is no why, only a 'how'

eventually all matter/energy will reconverge into one singularity and another big bang will result in another universe

too hell with deep freeze theorists

>>730181514

there have been some particles observed going faster than light recently

>>730180476
The tachyon is the theoretical super luminous particle that exists mathematically. Quantum entanglement is the phenomenon of two particles arising from the same reaction will exhibit exactly opposite quantum characteristics like spin. If you measure a spin direction on one particle, the other particle will be opposite spin. Somehow the particles communicate super luminosity. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance". Experiments confirm this. I think gravity must operate at super luminous speeds.

>>730181618
When you say space/time does that mean the black stuff around the planets are actually time itself?

>>730181708

>Citation needed
A few years ago someone made that claim at the LHC, but it turned out to be a problem with the equipment.

>>730181708
Your mom on my cock goes faster than the speed of light recently too or were you talking about a separate occurrence?

>>730181514
Don't neutrinos or whatever they recently discovered travel faster than photons?

>>730181758
It doesn't.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3232-first-speed-of-gravity-measurement-revealed/

>>730178030
possibly. idk man. I just got this antigravity book, I havent been able to put it down.


ill let you know.

>>730181708
If that were the case you would have seen that posted on every news channel. Haven't seen any tweets from atlas or CMS experiments about it.

>>730181958
Never mind, a quick Google search let me know it was an experimental error. Never followed up on that after hearing about it, so that's my fault.

>>730181708
lol no.

>>730181805

the black stuff, being empty space isn't really empty per se

it still represent distance, and space can be warped by great mass or other high mass phenomenon like dark energy

when space is warped, the effect of distance is altered and thus so is time

now this doesn't mean space is some soup apart from mass, all things in the universe are considered space, and as well time is a component of everything

people say space/time in regards to gravity because of the dynamic of space and time are directly effected by gravity - they are essentially one thing and you should try to think about that until it makes sense if it doesn't already

File: 9f8be3a1030c24e1eefdcd82c8519668.jpg (30KB, 450x342px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 450x342px

>>730182388
rekt.

why is it that all the people i know with children don't give a fuck about the earth's future, let alone give a shit enough to not lead selfish dickwad lifestyles?

>>730181958
No. Neutrinos were thought to be massless, but their mass was measured years ago. Nothing travels faster than light in the same inertial reference frame.

>>730178030

Gravity doesnt exist. The reason things rise and fall on this world is because of buoyancy. Dense things take the "bottom space" and less-dense objects tend to go higher. It is the bottle-filled-with-sand-rocks-water-and-oil experiement all over again, but in a world-sized scale.

How does science "prove" that gravity is what keeps entire oceans from "falling" away from earth? They dont. They dont ever prove it. Gravity is allegedly so pwoerful it can keep oceans in place, but I can get a fucking balloon, fill it with helium, and see that thing fly away into the clouds. Is gravity some "racist" force that discriminates cerain objects and only acts on some? Seems like bullshit to me. Gravity either affects EVERYTHING or NOTHING at all. There is no in-between.

PS: we live in an electrical world. We are electrical beings living lives filled with electricity, and our world leaders are brainwashing us to think we came from a big bang and will die and become nothing at all.

>>730179354
What? No it doesn't. Gravity's specific pull would relate to the mass of the object. If gravity moved at light speed, your pencil would be on the floor before you saw it fall.

>>730182610
Gravity does affect a balloon but it also affect the air inside of the balloon and the air outside. Depending on their respective densities, the balloon may rise, fall or remain stationary.

>>730179268
Sounds like you want to fuck him in the ass

>>730182833
Bullshit. Prove to me that "gravity" affects a balloon with helium. In fact, dont prove it to me; prove it to YOURSELF.

>>730182964
Do you agree that if you fill up a balloon with helium it will rise up?

>>730182550
I know, I was referring to more recently when they were observed traveling faster than light. However it appears to have been experimental error that was later corrected, but I never heard about the error part. Hence >>730182262

>>730178030
No

>>730182610

the explain why helium doesn't float away from the moon

>>730178030

Yes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhP_tI-AyIY

>>730182964
You're confused between weight and density. You need to go back to class. When you're finished with sixth grade, you can come back and discuss things.

If you're an adult, you need to stop projecting your inability to comprehend basic principles of fluid dynamics on others as a superiority complex about fabricated falsehoods.

>>730182011
Well that's one experiment. And even in that link they mention brane world theories, which suggest that gravity "takes a shortcut through extra rolled up dimensions". I suppose if the lhc continues to reinforce super summitry and string theory dies then the brane theory thing dies with it.

>>730182808
Go sit in the corner and think about what you've just said until you realize how dumb it is.

>>730178030
no, it is feminism.

>>730183250
because it doesnt get to the moon because it gets ripped apart in space, dumass.

>>730182964
Proven
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs

>>730182964
2 parts. Balloon and air. Remove the air, the balloon falls to the earth because of its gravity. There's too much density because the balloon is small. It's weight is concentrated across a smaller area, therefore it's more dense. When filled with helium, it becomes much more voluminous, but the balloon itself weighs the same. The helium weighs less than the surrounding air by a fair margin. It's only the weight of the balloon that keeps it from reaching the heliosphere.

>>730183072

Yes, I do because Ive done it myself, mother fucker. Now come at me with your brilliant comeback that is supposed to rekt me.

>>730182610
Lol

Never reproduce.

>>730183398
rekt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs

>>730182964
A balloon that floats in air will sink in a vacuum chamber, I.e. the gravity drags the balloon down when there is no air for it to float on

>>730183250

I dont know of anybody who has ever done an experiment regarding both moon and helium, nor have I done such expreiment.

>>730183343

well you're just full of shit, helium is all over the surface of the moon, helium comes from the sun and the moon's extremely low gravity allows it to land and become trapped there in it's micro atmosphere and in the soil

source: nasa and the apollo landings

>>730183545
Inb4 moon landing deniers

>>730183280

Why are things heavy? Why are things not-heavy? Because of its density. And why do objects go up or down? Because of its density. And to send someone back to sixth grade is the same as sending them into Brainwash Central. The education system is what has people programmed into believing in shit like gravity, aliens, Earth nucleus, the atom model, the big bang, black holes, etc.

>>730183545
lol no there isnt anything at the moon except a flag.its in space you massive fucking faggot. helium is the shit they put it balloons, its not at the moon..

Who else thinks it's fucking hilarious that a giant douche nozzle like bill Nye was leading some March for science thing today. I weep for the future of stem studies.

>>730183507
You are wrong. The balloon with helium goes down in a vaccum chamber because the helium is heavier than the space around it. It tends to go down. And the reason is electromagnetism, and the source for electromagentism is beneath our very feet.

It all comes in waves.

>>730183593
Moon landing footage is fake as fuck. Never happend.

File: Primer Fields.jpg (46KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1920x1080px

Gravity is just a electromagnetic dipole attraction force between atoms, See Electric Universe and "Thunderbolts Project" on Youtube, Gravity is the driving force of solar systems, yes, But the electromagnetic force in our universe is the most dominant.

Befor you solve the secrets of the universe maybe you should read a book the earth is flat not round.

>>730183692
The higgs bozon gives particles mass.

>>730183919
Then why can't I attract a heavy log with an electromagnet?

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvHqXK_Hz79tjqRosK4tWYA

>>730184081
nah, it did happen. it happened in one of those movie hangar stages in los angeles.

>>730183919

or maybe because the helium is inside the balloon and gravity pulls the balloon down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73mZMcV-OgU

Discussion on the speed of gravity.

Gravity has to be faster than light, if it wasn't, then our earth for example would be gravitationally attracted to the sun, but the sun as it was positioned 8 minutes ago, so our planet will be flung out of our solar system.

>>730183284
They said it puts constraints on the brane world theories. It's also a fairly old article and experiment. Since then, gravity waves have been directly measured moving at the speed of light.

>>730182964

Calm down

By your assumption, thing would move only by a density difference and you are also assuming that vacuum does have a density. I need you to answer the following:

- Is vacuum more or less dense than the balloon?
- As the balloon is on outer space, where would it go?

>>730184387
I haven't really read much about it but now I will.

File: Yves Tanguy.jpg (174KB, 670x788px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 670x788px

so you bastards know about the electric universe theory?

in simple words it says that the understanding of everything and how we study the universe is based on mass. planets, galaxies, time, etc-

but instead we should be thinking of electromagnetism/plasma... to see the whole universe as a huge electric network. and if you start from there, a lot of well overthinked and yet with no solutions modern physic/universe problems are easily explained. its just a modern theory that starts from electricity instead of mass.

think about it, we started to understand basic electricity just recently. its understandable that we built all our theories from mass as we understood that before...

and there ara a ton of documentaries and books about it.. its working the same problems from other basis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKx86mTin-Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfnw4aycYM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK6zHysxoCo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfsXdpOXFd8

one of those docus sucked, but i saw them way back.. so dont remember wich one it was. also my english sucks. but oh well.

>>730182610
> I can get a fucking balloon, fill it with helium, and see that thing fly away into the clouds
why's that a surprise? the balloon contents are less dense than the atmosphere in which it floats including the mass of the balloon
the atmospheric pressure is at its greatest at sea level, as altitude increases atmospheric pressure decreases, so eventually the balloon will stop going up because the density of the balloon relative to the supporting environment under the influence of gravity will reach equilibrium.

>>730183692
>why do objects go up or down? Because of its density
because of relative density
density is mass over volume
gravity's effect is on mass
gravity is 9.81m/s², we can make predictions with this

>>730181758
Quantum entanglement doesn't transfer data, it doesn't actually break the speed of light.

The tachyon is just theoretical and never been observed.

Gravity moves at the speed of light.

>>730183398
Hey, answer me

If the balloon is at outer space, away from everything, where would it go?

>>730179857
It's not IF "you travel beyond [the speed of light]". The laws of physics dictate that you CANNOT exceed the speed of light. You cannot even achieve the speed of light. The notion of travelling back in time is nonsense.

>>730182808
The effect of gravity propagates at the speed of light. Gravity itself moves matter based on mass. Go back to school.

>>730185728
no dude its saturday night, school isnt open.

>>730182841
Haven't laughed on /b/ in months.

>have a cookie

>>730183072
In an atmosphere denser than helium the balloon rises. In an atmosphere less dense the helium balloon falls.

>>730186058
I was just asking the guy who didn't know how gravity worked

>>730185173
It would move according to the gravitic forces of the objects around it.

>>730186513
Again, that was for the guy assuming gravity didn't exist

>>730186584
what is it though? it isnt anything, its real, sure, but it doesnt actually exist.

>>730182550
That's not quite correct, only the mass DIFFERENCE between the three mass states have been measure. The actual masses have not been measured yet but you're point still stands; they aren't massless.
>>730181958
Somebody prematurely stated they measured faster than light neutrinos, a cable was not securely measured which accounted for the time delay.

>>730186700
It's a concept we made for this thing we perceive that moves stuff with 'mass' around. One way to see it is as a curvature

>>730186755
been measured*
securely connected*
Time for bed I guess....

>>730186958
so then it doesnt exist.

>>730187024
From that perspective nothing does

>>730187024
Nice. Now jump off a bridge.

>>730187096
no.

>>730187149
but what is it? it isnt anything but its there.

>>730187153
no what?

>>730187193
It's a force between any 2 masses.

>>730187193
Asking what gravity or mass is is like asking what the number four is. Sure you can give me an entire description but it is still an convention

>>730187219
no your wrong.

>>730187442
but the number 4 doesnt make me stick to the ground.

>>730184081
>>730184315

Fuckwits. I love how most people can't fathom the concept that the moonlanding the world saw was shot in a studio, due to idiotic cold-war rivalry with Russia, while the actual moon landing happened covertly.

But nah, yeah it had to be one or the other right?

>>730187452
ok, you have seven legs

>>730187381
lol no.

>>730187526
Fun fact. Your body is attracting the earth with exactly the same force as the earth attracts your body.

Don't you feel attractive now?

File: 1343582219599.jpg (161KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1600x1200px

>>730178645
this anon has it

gravity is the irreconcilable force. electromagnetism works on to defined a scale. once critical proximity is achieved even gravity is void to its influence, barring black hole conditions. gravity extends it influence across the cosmos yet has comparatively weak interaction on the small scale where as electromagnetism is absolute on the small and weak on the large.

>>730187588
Care to elaborate?

>>730187526
Good point, now you can notice that those definitions that we give aren't entirely arbitrary, they are based on our perception of reality. In the case of the number four, you have the feeling that

i i i i

and

i i i

are somehow different

>>730187770
no.

>>730182841
Its not gay if its science

>>730187705
no.

>>730187859
yee

>>730187866
yea it is, science is pretty gay dude.

>>730187746
lol no. I shouldnt have to, retard.

>>730179857
we don't dictate it.

the speed of light is more the max observable limit of energy in our dimension. past that it is another form

>>730187745
Electromagnetism also has infinte range.
It's just that postive and negative charges cancel each other locally.

>>730180558
untrue.

>>730187966
I'll have to take your word for it.
There's nothing wrong with my definition.

>>730188216
yea there is, you retard. holy shit dude, you are fucking dumb.

>>730188154
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_energy

>>730188309
It's sad to be as smart as you and lack the means to express yourself.

>>730183250
If you're referring to helium 3 being present on the moon, you are stupid. its in a frozen state and therefore more massive than in the gaseous state so it doesn't "float away"

File: tumblr_mw569jSjdu1sqaqhdo3_500.gif (955KB, 500x190px) Image search: [Google]

955KB, 500x190px

>>730178030
...go on...

>>730188433
wow. all I can say. just wow.

>>730188461
Nope. It's embedded into dirt particles.
In riduculously small amounts.

Helium 3 is a red herring anyway.

>>730178030
The search for a Grand Unified Theory is hoping for just this result. That all four fundamental forces will emerge from one deeper convergence. So far EM, the weak force, and the strong force have all been shown to emerge from a single force at higher energies, but gravity has resisted being shoehorned into that just yet.

>>730188461
actually it's just not there, but thanks for playing.

Well, the accretion process itself is kick started by static electricity becuase The dust particles themselves were too small to have a gravitational effect.

we should make a new thread

>>730182841
Fuck him in the "mass"

>>730178030
Yes, it is possible. And to devise a theory that unifies electromagnetism and gravity is one of the greatest goals of modern physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

>>730188791
ur mom's butt

>>730188091
it doesn't though. only relative to the charge it has can it travel. a laser moves through space in one direction until it is acted upon, interacts with (hits something), or loses energy in some way and dissipates. electromagnetism is localized in its field effects.

>>730188362
not measuring the independent forms there only their interaction. they are still separate

>>730189067
Electromagentism acts via photons.

>>730188668
wow, stupid

>>730189067
>charge
>laser
Laser are photons. Photons have no charge.

>>730178030
They already basically are one in the same at the atomic level. It's the larger forces where it deviates. Lel at all the plebs saying no, it's more complicated than simply no.

>>730189270
No charge is transferred via electromagnetic force

>>730189240
it does. energy is just mass freed of the closer entanglements of other nuclear mass.

>>730189389
You can transfer electrical charges via electromagnetic force.

>>730182964
Lol, so many took the bait.

>>730189285
>basically are one in the same at the atomic level
No

No, but it's possible it's actually just maximization of space in an ever expanding 4 to 7 dimensional universe. Not necessarily string but definitely extra dimensional. Google it.

>>730182610
Define rise
Define fall
Define density
Define buoyancy

>>730178030
Using the Holographic Principle, gravity might be an emergent property and not a fundamental force. ("Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe, E.P. Verlinde, 2016 Nov 7)

No. You dweeb. http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/physics/140-physics/the-theory-of-relativity/general-relativity/1023-if-gravity-is-a-curvature-of-space-rather-than-a-force-why-do-a-ball-and-bullet-follow-different-paths-intermediate

Weak forces and all....

>>730190122
>definitely extra dimensional
Doesn't have to be extra dimensional.

File: 1489288422107.webm (362KB, 212x320px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 212x320px

>>730179509
How so, the earth is clearly flat in that picture you just have artisum, everyone else knows that the earth is flat artist

Yes I know for a fact that it's electromagnetic, I have attached super strong magnets to the bottom of my shoes and float through the air to get around

Does anyone really believe that the earth is flat or are they all trolls?

>>730190638
Wrong thread?

>>730190388
It sort of does. It's in the math.

>>730190638
98% are trolls the rest fell for it and actually believe it...same as how religion probably started

File: 1423688326741.jpg (165KB, 921x800px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 921x800px

>>730190638
Typically two kinds of people that are flat-earthers.
Those who want to troll for lulz and
Those who want to work on their debate skills.

>>730190767
Gravity = electromagnetism is a flat earth thing as far as I know and there are some flat earthy posts in this thread.

>>730190876
That's not how religion works. It's almost always one conman and it snowballs. Every now and again it's one crazy person with charisma. Usually it's a crazy conman, like Trump.

>>730191156
huh, didn't know that

There is no generally accepted theory which explains both gravity and electromagnetism (i.e. a 'unified theory'), so we don't entirely know how they interact / work-together. Our current framework ('quantum electrodynamics') describes electricity and magnetism as fields on top of a (possibly curved) space-time. I.e. the space-time is treated differently from the electromagnetism.

File: Screenshot_2017-04-23-01-37-43.png (276KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 720x1280px

What have I come upon?
Somethng that always happens

>>730178827
That isn't how gravity works. Super condensed matter doesn't absorb everything around it. Black holes have an event horizon becuase the photons quite literally collide with it.

>>730181618
THANK YOU

>>730191655
Superfluid vacuum theory will be that grand unified theory.

You heard it here first.

>>730179857
Effective faster than light travel is actually possible, but you would need to heavily alter gravity wells in order to do it. Meaning that you would be shortening the distance between two points and not actually moving faster than light while at the same time achieving a speed of travel that is faster.

>>730181805
Its not empty its full of gas,rocks, and other shit. Even some actual astronaught shit.

>>730178827
Think of this on a smaller scale first.

Lets compress our Sun so much it forms a black hole. Now your first thought might be "shit we are 8 light minutes away from a black hole we are doomed!"... but the density never actually changes, its just in a much smaller area. That being said, our orbit around the new black hole would be no different from our orbit around the sun. There is the same amount of density, thus the same amount of gravity.

Expanding this to your hypothetical, if there were to be a condensed mass dense enough to affect the entire observable universe, it would have had to have begun as a mass much larger than the observable universe. This goes beyond the realm of theoretically possible, making your hypothetical not worth putting much more thought into.

>>730191655
physics grad af...

>>730182808
Yes it does dildo.

>>730192422
Ehhh i get what you're saying but black holes really affect gravitational pull and would quickly pull in any. celestial body and gain mass . It's all
theory so nobody knows what would really happen

>>730192422
wrong. the density WILL change. fucking idiot

>>730192422
the gravitational field will not be the same. The field for a main sequence star varies greatly from that of a black hole

>>730193297
We know exactly what would happen. How do you think entire galaxies maintain stable orbits around massive black holes? The only time a black hole would "suck something in" and gain mass is if that object passed its event horizon, which is definitely NOT the entirety of the black hole's gravity well.

Again using the Sun example. The Sun has no reason to randomly "pull things in" out of stable orbit unless there was specifically an event to destabilize an orbit to begin with. If the Sun were compressed into a black hole, this idea wouldn't change.

>>730193386
>>730193486

Fg = mg

mass cannot be created or destroyed. A black hole's gravity well would be the exact same as the star it was made from assuming the mass didn't change.

>>730179509
thats just an effect of the pixels, the picture itself is as flat as the earth

>>730193974

I don't think you understand what density is.

>>730193974
yes, in newtonian limits gravity behaves the same everywhere, but for compact objects such as neutron stars and black holes you need special rules, hence General Relativity. We know from GR that the fields for space-time are different between main sequence stars and denser objects like black holes. Also, if you compress a mass (change its volume) while keeping mass constant density WILL change. That is the definition of density, mass over volume.

>>730194418
I misspoke and said density originally instead of mass.

What I am saying is that compressing an object doesn't affect its mass.

>>730178030
No
the molten core is the source of the field, The mass of the Earth is the source of gravity.

>>730194473
I was under the impression that GR only becomes applicable once you are /very/ close to a black hole IE at or near its Schwarzschild radius. Outside of this black holes behave well within the bounds of classic newtonian physics.

Additionally I'd like to add that when a star "turns into" a black hole much of its mass is blown away in a supernova, and if our Sun were to blow up and turn into a black hole outer planets might actually become gravitationally unbound due to the amount of mass lost.

File: eddietheflatearthbravo.jpg (276KB, 1500x2011px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1500x2011px

>>730178432

>>730180357
Not really, they experience their whole journey in a single instant no matter how far they travel

>>730195248
It is a matter of "how close". Yes, from very very far it will behave as a point mass, and in some intermediate area the limits will show newtonian characteristics. It will show exotic behavior for a long range (depending on the mass, spin, etc...) but it will not be tame till very very far away. No way a planet has a normal orbit eight light minutes from a black hole.