1

LeSage proposed a theory of gravity that describes as well as explains gravity. Space is filled with corpuscles that push masses on all side. As a result two masses will start to move to each other because they are pushed on one side more than on the other.

How did he see these particles himself? Like worldly particles? Like extramundane particles? Like gravitons maybe, the source being the masses themselves?

J. W. Tanner
  • 479
  • 3
  • 11
Deschele Schilder
  • 1
  • 8
  • 14
  • If the source was the masses themselves the pushing will result in repulsion instead of attraction. The corpuscles were out of this world propelled by force unknown that manages to maintain their perfectly uniform flow despite all the colliding. Assuming it can somehow be relativized and quantized, gravitons would not exist on this theory, they'll be fictitious particles like phonons. – Conifold Aug 11 '21 at 00:21
  • @Conifold It could be attraction too. It competely depends on the nature of the corpusles. If they are graviton like then attraction will appear, obviously. Thats why I asked about their nature.i dont know why you bring on phonons. These are real particles. – Deschele Schilder Aug 11 '21 at 00:34
  • You are thinking of "quantum particles" in modern physics, with special properties and interactions via their exchange. The corpuscles were simple classical small balls that create the effect of gravity force, and they could not create an attraction effect if emitted by the bodies. On this picture, gravity field and "gravitons" would be effective fictions, an artifact of corpuscular dynamics. Hence the analogy to phonons. – Conifold Aug 11 '21 at 00:59
  • @Conifold I think you mean photons. So the particles were seen as minute pepples? – Deschele Schilder Aug 11 '21 at 01:06
  • No, I mean phonons. Photons, like gravitons, are meant to be carriers of a real field. But in condensed matter you have real oscillating atoms that collectively create sound wave formations. You can then quantize those mathematically and describe waves in terms of fictitious traveling particles, phonons. The oscillating atoms are the analog of Le Sage's corpuscles, and the phonons are the analog of gravitons. The point of the theory was to explain gravity, if corpuscles had fancy properties they would have been no better than gravity itself. – Conifold Aug 11 '21 at 02:54
  • @Conifold You compare apples with oranges. You just meant photons. These can be compared with gravitons. The corpusculs are just masses traveling through space you eais. – Deschele Schilder Aug 11 '21 at 04:06
  • @Conifold You really think atoms were known to LeSage? You wrote: small balls. Now you write phonons in small balls which is Inconsistent. Gravitons are more like corpuscules that way. – Deschele Schilder Aug 11 '21 at 04:11
  • The analogy is functional, there is real base (atoms, corpuscles), its effects (gravity, sound waves), and effective description (gravitons, phonons). But it seems it confused you more than explained. Not sure what "phonons in small balls" refers to. – Conifold Aug 11 '21 at 04:28

0 Answers0