does bent space use energy?

 

if so, where does it get it?

 

i dont see how it could condense something to singularity without using a vast amount of it. well, i do, but im curios.

 

could you use bent space to make energy? i know it goes against the whole energy cant be made or destroyed, only converted to different forms, but i dont see why it couldnt. maybe have something on a {big} planet that makes energy from the compression being put upon it by that bent space.

"Using" energy is not the right way to phrase it. And there are two different concepts here — the energy of the field, and the energy of something in the field.

 

Fields contain energy, or, if it's something you can turn on and off, like an electric or magnetic field, it takes energy to create the field. But unlike electrodynamics, where you can have zero field and then create a field, you don't have this situation in gravity. In GR this is a bit of a problem

 

http://www.physics.ucla.edu/~cwp/articles/noether.asg/noether.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_solution_(general_relativity)#Gravitational_energy

 

the gravitational field can do work, so we must expect the gravitational field itself to possess energy, and it does. However, determining the precise location of this gravitational field energy is technically problematical in general relativity

 

I suspect the answer to "where does it get it?" is that it's been there all along.

I suspect the answer to "where does it get it?" is that it's been there all along.

 

like some unkown particle everywhere wich contains the energy itself and maybe stretch's once placed near and pulled by the mass of a dense object, like a planet?

 

jsut a guess...

does bent space use energy?

 

yes

 

 

 

 

if so, where does it get it?

 

from the matter in space

 

i dont see how it could condense something to singularity without using a vast amount of it. well, i do, but im curios.

 

hmmm..

 

could you use bent space to make energy?

 

no

 

since space has NO fabric associated with it

since space has NO fabric associated with it

 

are you sure there? maybe nothing weve come across, but it seems that all the data other than the amount directly containing what weve tooken from space regarding this idea seems to suggest there should be. maybe its just undetectable so far.

are you sure there? maybe nothing weve come across, but it seems that all the data other than the amount directly containing what weve tooken from space regarding this idea seems to suggest there should be. maybe its just undetectable so far.

 

It seems most experts agree that space is just a metric but there are a few that think there may be an ether that has not been defined yet. Nobel Prize winner Frank Wilczek calls it a grid "But the Grid is highly evolved ether,

ether on steroids if you like, with many new features."

are you sure there?

 

Given north's stance in other posts, I'd have to say the answer to that is "probably not."

 

However, this is going off-topic. If anyone wants to discuss the nature of the fabric space (or non-fabric, as the case may be) it should be done in its own thread.

is it possible that the mass of an object bending space supplie the energy used in gravity? maybe the constant force against it is doing something like knocking electrons off of it wich in turn fuel the energy needs for gravity? just a guess.

is it possible that the mass of an object bending space supplie the energy used in gravity? maybe the constant force against it is doing something like knocking electrons off of it wich in turn fuel the energy needs for gravity? just a guess.

 

Electrons don't tend to disappear and be eaten up by space itself. But maybe the graviton, if it exists. There could be a force carrier particle for gravity (the graviton) that could be carrying the energy to bend space, but it hasn't been identified yet.

how many tests have been done? does any one know?

 

im sure that the iss and space lab conducted some. id like to see the results.

Given north's stance in other posts, I'd have to say the answer to that is "probably not."

 

However, this is going off-topic. If anyone wants to discuss the nature of the fabric space (or non-fabric, as the case may be) it should be done in its own thread.

 

hihi.. I haven't been on the forum in agesssssss and am reading around a bit.. and I have to say.. I noticed this North's comments here and there... and I most probably would agree with you.

ouch. come on, give him a break. hes just expressing his ideas like the rest of us. maybe not in a way wich is scientifically backed up, or true at all, but we all learn from mistakes.