Gravity - A Thought Experiment

>>9029805
no... it starts to pull the Earth into itself, until it is so massive that it rips the Earth apart and the Earth merges with it.

>>9029811
But in this experiment, they are two indestructible bodies. I know none of this possible I'm just seeing where it leads to - gravity wise.

>>9029818
They're impenetrable not indestructible, brainlet.

>>9029825
Well I'm OP and that's what I meant. There's no merging or ripping apart allowed.

>>9029829
Then the earth starts to stick to it instead of it sticking to the earth. Do you not know how gravity works?

If they are both impenetrable there will be a point when the roles would reverse and earth would be attracted to the boulder. Perhaps it would start rotating around the boulder, I'm not quite sure about that.

>>9029829
Look at me. I'm the OP now.

>>9029805
why would it stop applying more pressure?

>>9029832
this anon is correct. The orbit of such a body would be fucked up with the sun though, as it would not be a normal sphere, instead a huge pair of balls.

The balls would just kind of crash into the sun because of the lack of a stable orbit.

>constantly gains mass from nowhere
eventually a black hole would form around the boulder-earth system, without destroying it
would there be one singularity? would there be infinite singularities on the surface of the boulder-earth formation? would it be some kind of unstable system?

after a certain time the mass would be so great that it would probably attract the entire universe

>>9029841
Wouldn't there be a point where the boulder rolls around the earth because it's mass becomes too much for gravity to hold in place? Wouldn't it gather speed and then separate?

>>9029805
>What happens?
The boulder lies there on the earth. If it's light enough, you can lift it, and drop it after. Nothing else.

>Does the boulder reach a point where it stops applying more pressure to the Earths crust and actually gets 'lighter' and simply floats off into space since it cannot merge with the Earth?
No. It just lies there. If it were not indestructible it would at some point collapse and form a mountain; if it is indestructible, you end up with an ever larger ball lying on the earth. The ball growing larger and larger changes nothing.

>>9029848
No. Why would it do that?

>>9029861
OP said nothing about volume, only mass.

>>9029865
Well, that doesn't change anything about the behavior of the increasingly heavy ball.

Interested in how the fuck op thinks they would separate

>>9029872
Everything you've said here is incorrect, including your use of a semicolon.

>>9029902
Well how massive would the boulder have to get to start attracting the Earth then? At equivalent mass? Less maybe?

>>9029926
It would have to be less. The moon is smaller than Earth and it causes the tides. I just wonder at what point in mass does something get its own gravitational field?

>>9029926
They attract each other at all times. You attract the earth right now as we speak. As some point, the boulder grows massive enough for this effect to become substantial.

>>9029805
eventually the small boulder becomes the center of gravity and the earth would rotate around it

and then even more eventually it would turn into a black hole

>>9029926
They attract eachour with equal force proportional to the product of their masses. You can't understand anything In physics without the math.

>>9029847
well, the entire "universe"

>>9030487
>you cant understand hurkadurka durr

dumb.

youre dumb.

>>9030489
Great post you retarded faggot. Put a bullet in your head.

>>9030525
i would but i dont know how do shoot a gun because i cant do the math.

Are they infinitely rigid, or are deformations allowed? If they are rigid, then nothing interesting happens. If not, then they will deform, but I have no clue as to what shape they will converge towards.

>>9029805
The boulder would become so incredibly massive that its gravity would destroy the Earth. But as you said that Earth was "impenetrable" I would assume that it is indestructible. So they stay still in the same position until the boulder's mass is so huge that it collapse itself into a singularity and engulfs the Earth.

>>9031203
how can the singularity occur if the boulder has an impenetrable volume?

>>9029829
That also means humans are indestructible since we are mass as well
The same thing applies for food and our internal organisms
Nothing would make sense and everything wouldbe stopped in time
Your theory has too much contradictions fuckin brainlet go kys

>>9029805
The "barycenter" is the center of mass of the whole system: the two spheres.

To start, the barycenter is pretty much the center of the Earth. As the bould gains mass, the barycenter begins to move from the center of the Earth toward the boulder. Though you stipulate the two are indestructible, you do not stipulate that loose stuff on the surface of the Earth stays put (I assume the boulder is clean, as the Earth has been pulling any debris towards itself). Eventually the water on the surface will flow around the surface to head towards the significantly shifting barycenter. Eventually, other stuff sill start doing the same - soil, rocks, man-made stuff, animals, etc.

When the barycenter is at the point where the two meet, stuff will pile up to form a "neck" between the two spheres. As the barycenter moves inside the boulder, the stuff forming the neck will drift onto the surface of the boulder.

That pile won't amount to a significant amount in terms of size relative to the Earth and boulder, and it will flatten out a bit as the boulder continues to grow, but it won't disperse around the boulder very much from the original pile.

Black hole? Only if the material is dense enough to form an event horizon at or just above the surface. This is not likely.

So goes the preposterous.

>>9029930
When mass > 0. Everything has a gravitational field.

>>9032653
If the boulder is gaining mass from nowhere then it is obviously changing the molar mass of the material which obviously isn't plain old rock. That means eventually it would be dense enough to form a black hole.

>>9032674
Hmm. True, it was not said the size changes. Only the mass. I was imagining the material remained "boulder" and would gain size as a result of gaining mass.

So if we know what size the boulder is/stays, we can say when it becomes a black hole.

>>9032692
I think a more interesting question is what happens if the volume increases at such a high rate that it's bigger than the expansion rate of the universe. Eventually the boulder would run out of space, then what? Does the boulder create space by itself? Does the expansion invariably slows down? How are mass and space related? Space doesn't imply mass doesn't it? The existence of the vacuum proves that much. But if we move a particle with mass to "non-space" what would happen? Would it be like trying to accelerate an object to the speed of light or would space simply appear to hold the particle?