why does the 0planets and stars have gravity, but all the space around them dont? why is there mass (stars, pplanets) in outer space, where there’s no space? why? sum1 pleez help me get this clear!
ehhh, isn’t this supposed to be in general questions? o well…
and i dunno. just trying to boost my pitiful post count…
i’m going, i’m going! no need to push :huffy face:
Ow! no kicking!
d&r
uhmmm… huh?
first, is there a debate brewing here?
and second, what/huh/wazzat?
I thought that this was going to be a thread about Catholic gatherings. Anyhoo…
I’m interpreting this as “Why is there gravity ON the planet, but no gravity in orbit?” to which I reply, “There is.” You hear about “zero gravity” all the time in reference to the space shuttle, a few hundred miles above the Earth. You must think, “Aha! Earth’s gravity extends out only a few hundred miles!” (but then you wonder why the Moon keeps orbiting us). The answer, of course, is that there IS gravity in orbit. In fact, the gravitational pull in the space shuttle’s level of orbit (a few hundred miles up) is about the same as it is on the surface of the Earth. So why do the astronauts float? Because they are in free-fall.
Actually, there’s space everywhere. Between the atoms of air that you’re breathing - inside the atoms themselves, in fact. “Space” is just what we call a “vacuum” (or a near-vacuum, as even deep space has a random particle or two). Since matter has gravity, it tends to be attracted to other matter (other sources of gravity). This matter clumps together to form BIG chunks of matter (planets, gravity, Roseanne, etc.). However, all this matter has to come from somewhere… and it is sucked away from the areas that, now, have no (or almost no) matter… space. Think of it as the opposite of swiss cheese.
applause applause
again, still trying to boost my post…
gets booted out the door
ow!
SPOOFE wrote:
What the OP might have been asking – and it’s admittedly hard to tell, given the OP’s, ahem, wording – is this:
WHY does matter have gravity? And why is the amount of gravity that a chunk of matter produces directly proportional to its inertial mass?
According to general relativity, gravity is a bending of spacetime which only looks like a “force.” According to most quantum-mechanical speculations on the nature of gravity, however, gravitational forces are real forces (in the same sense that electromagnetism and the nuclear forces are real forces), caused by the exchange of hypothetical particles called gravitons. Are these two theories reconcilable with each other?
To which I answer… “For the same reason that Pauly Shore made movies: To make our lives miserable.” 
(Hey, I’m only allowed one in-depth analysis per thread.)