And what happens to gravitons and gravitinos.
134702
Gluons are the force particles of the strong nuclear force that keep the quarks together in protons and neutrons. Quarks exchange gluons between and this forces them to stick together.Compare this to a soccer team exchanging the ball between them: the players cannot be too far apart.\n\nGravitons are the force particles of gravitation. But contrary to gluons, they have not been detected.A lot of physics theory would fell apart if gravitons don't exist. \n\nGravitinos are entirely hypothetical. The arise in a theory called supersymmetry that tries to combine all four forces of nature into one.
442338
Depends on the Fed. And what happens with interest rates and inflation.
644779
Well the Pico Graviton is supposedly the predicted particle of "electromuon" not a substance per say but much like a photon.  It is used in the theory of auto-dynamics in which classical physics are altered in an attempt to describe the nature of gravity.\n\n  The current theory of relativity generally fits most situations in which gravity must be calculated.  (It's a rough equation)  But it does not account for such things as atomic decay.  Or the absorption of this "electromuon" which seems to accelerate electrons, causing them to spread out (bigger atom means less in the same space and means less atoms per volume (basically the effect of heating).\n\n  In essence Ricardo Carezani is attempting to describe gravity as the pull caused by the loss of these electromuon particles and the pull to return them to the atom.  \n\n  A pico Graviton is a electromuon which is much like a photon or a particle of light.
341252
See my answer to roughly the same exact question:\n\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Alup4mffF.dC.kKLZuPl1_Xsy6IX?qid=20061108093837AAg5ALh\n\n\n-----------\n\nactually, here:\n\nOnly the visible universe started. The rest of it always existed as a consequence of that which we call the Heisenburg Indeterminancy Principle (HIP). A vacuum with 0EV as its vacuum energy (aka: zero-point energy) would be perfectly determinable and a violation of the HIP.\n\nThis initial baseline is known as the inflaton.\n\nImagine a big rubber sheet, infinitely long and wide, and extremely thin. The thing will be vibrating fairly randomly just from the non-zero zeropoint energy. These energy fluctuations propagate as waves. Get enough waves adding up, and you'll get some pretty high crests and valleys. Get a big enough deviation, and you'll stretch the rubber in that immediate area so much that its elasticity will change. This is analgous to a vacuum phase change. In the rubber, the sudden rearrangement of the molecules will be released as heat, in a vacuum phase change, the potential energy is released as a massive swelling of spacetime and particles. It's as though the hill gets so high that the rubber loses a great deal of its elasticity and spreads out hugely because it no longer has the same force pulling it back to itself.\n\nIts presence in the rubber sheet will remain only the size of the original hill. Its internal size however, will be much, MUCH larger. This also extends to the real situation. Within the inflaton, the whole universe, our visible universe is smaller than planck scale. However, internally, we're so big that our universe would literally be spawning nearly infinitely many universes itself. We can't see them because they are sub-planck to us, nor can they see us because we are behind their inflationary wall. Inflation happens at speeds that are superluminal, so causality breaks down at this point. The interesting thing of the wall though is that it perfectly MAINTAINS causality.\n\nLong story short: what we see started, randomly. Where it exists had to ALWAYS exist, it could not have not existed.\n\n-------------\n\nThe inflaton isn't being damped. Quantum wave functions are perfect in that regard -- they aren't ACTUAL waves... or they are waves propagated by lossless particles... or... well... you seem an intelligent gent, I'm sure you realize quantum physics has some non-normal takes on a few things. It's sufficient to say that quantum wave functions are fundamental. The vacuum energy of a vacuum is a constant. In fact, it's possible via quantum tunneling for a vacuum's energy to increase in a small area, and this itself would cause a propagative state change.\n\nLet us say, for example, that the base inflaton has a 10 ^ 100 EV baseline. Our visible universe's particular vacuum state has something significantly lower (I don't recall off the top of my head -- a single cubic centimeter contains enough vacuum energy to boil off earth's oceans though). Let's say 10 ^ 90 EV. Because of the nature of quantum randomness, it is possible for a sub-planck fluctuation to momentarily jump to 10 ^ 110. If that fluctuation then spawned a sub-universe, it's vacuum energy might be 10^100 EV -- the same as the original inflaton, more than the 'parent' universe.\n\nThere, by the way, is your quantum entropy. The average total of all universes' vacuum energies would be fluctuating around a central point in a probablistic manner.
167923
Mass (or rather gravity) bends space, as has been proved sometime ago = it works in this way - Imagine a water bed representing space. If you place a heavy canon ball on the water bed, the bed would have an indentation where the canon ball was placed. The area surrounding the canon ball would also be warped towards the canon ball. So if you placed a tennis ball on the bed near the canon ball, the tennis ball would roll downwards and lie touching the canonball. Similarly, huge masses such as the sun, do bend space.\n\nThis is one of examples associated with proving the existence of black holes too.
404718
"...Does the black hole continue to increase in mass and increase the gravitational affect?..."\nWe haven't been studying black holes long enough yet to determine if their mass does increase from all the material being drawn in. Theoretically it would.\n\n"...does all that stuff get shot out in another direction?..."\nExactly what happens to material that disappears beyond the event horizon of black holes isn't known for sure because there's no way science can observe what goes on there. A few speculations persist about so-called  'white holes,' the drain of black holes where everything re-appears in another universe or dimension.\n\n"...Do black holes ever die? And if so, what happens to them?..."\nAgain, science doesn't know because the observational evidence just isn't there. However, Stephen Hawking has developed a workable theory showing that over great lengths of time black holes can actually radiate some of their energy and in time would evaporate.
18858
There are multiple possibilities:\na) The universe stops expanding, starts collapsing, and squishes back together (the "Big Crunch" theory)\nb) Basically the Big Crunch theory, except it states that  the universe will "bounce" back out again (the "Big Bounce" theory)\nc)The universe will eventually even out in temperature, and effectively freeze over, so no stars can shine (the "Heat Death" theory)\nd)Vacuum energy will eventually become so strong that every atom in the universe will tear at the exact same moment into traces of radiation (the "Big Rip" theory)\ne)Protons after 10^100 years will decay, leaving the same result as in the Big Rip ("Proton Decay")\n\nNote: Possibility "e" will happen regardless of any other of these possibilities, even though 10^100 years is a rrrreeeeaaaallllllllyyyy long time.
57299
We have no idea what happens to any matter inside a black hole. The laws of physics that we know do not apply.
618256
They start out as an enormous gas cloud. Gravity causes the parcicles in the cloud to spin around the point of center mass, and the velocity of the spin subsequently flattens it into a disk. That's how galaxies, and on a much smaller scale, planetary systems form.
644672
Gravity can be used in all frames of reference.  Nano and pico systems like the ones you refer to do have gravity interactions, it's just that there are forces that work very strongly at very small distances, so gravity isn't as big of a consideration, relatively.  You can tell gravity effects light because light gets pulled into black holes.  \nI don't think gravity has a constant anymore though.  Last thing I knew Newton's gravity constant only works on macroscopic systems. \nAll frames are equivalent.  It's just that on a macroscopic scale the modeling for the equations gets much easier and approximates Newton's equation very closely.
341318
There are two way to look at it.\nIn Relativity, gravity isn't thing itself just a bending of space. Just like a bend in the road is only a way to describe something about a road.\nIn Quantum Mechanics, gravity is actually made up of Bosons (particle carriers of force) called Gravitons. To date gravitons are purely theoretical since no one has manages to observe a graviton yet.\nWhile this may sounds weird, both are correct.
115713
gravity.\n\nany shape of mass that is not spherical is gravitationally unstable
533139
The existence of gravitons has not been proven.   \n\nThe existence of gravitons is postulated by quantum theory.  For them to exist, they must be massless.  Assuming that they massless, they are unaffected by gravity.  Thus, they can escape from a blackhole.
506502
If it has a strong gravitational field, light will bend towards it. No sucking involved.
287598
Anew theory of gravity as well as a unified field theory (UFT) are being proposed, showing how the four force fields work together, implicating also a fifth field. A main feature of this new model is the proposal of the existence of diallel, gravitational-field lines that emanate from every entity. For the earth, for example, they emanate radially from its center. These diallel lines provide a conduit for combined particle and wave flow and exchange beyond the speed of light, and they have quantum states similar to the atom. On the web site, we present a general field equation showing the importance of energy density in this new UFT. We also present a new gravitational force equation, that has as a special case the commonly accepted gravitational equation.
50048
They emmit radio waves.\n\nIn addition, they create huge gravitational forces on nearby stars and such.
500681
Both their accelerations will be the same and equal to the acceleration due to gravity, g=9.81 m/s/s...This is coz the only force acting on them is the force due to gravity