<p>As a hobbyist, I'll give a limited answer.   </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Gravitational force is particle or wave?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Until we actually find out what gravity is, the safe answer here is that we don't know, but it's probably a wave and a particle.   Most (perhaps all) fundamental particles in quantum physics are waves and particles.   Light for example, Electrons too, though we might think of an electron as a particle, it's wave properties are easily demonstrated, and wave properties of protons can be demonstrated as well.  There's a ton of stuff that can be googled on the wave-particle duality.  Here's <a href="http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/uncertainty/uncertainty3.html" rel="nofollow">one</a>.</p>

<p>It's unclear exactly what fundamental particles "are" so saying a fundamental particle is "this or that" is a bit iffy since we can't see them.  We can only study how they behave.   Gravity, if it's a fundamental particle, which it probably is, it should be both a wave and a particle, and a field.   I know, that's a little hard to think about.  We don't get to have many tangible answers in quantum physics. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I know that gravitation depend of the mass and the rotation speed</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Gravity depends on mass.  Period.   Rotation speed can creates a centrifugal force opposing gravity and making things lighter, but that isn't gravity.   The gravity is still 100% governed by mass.   </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>what is the transmission medium of this wave the same like
  transmission medium of the light ?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Light (as far as I know) doesn't require a transmission medium.  Gravity shouldn't either.   Sound waves require a medium but light and gravity can pass through empty space.</p>

<p>If you have more specific questions, you might have better luck on Physics rather than Astronomy.  Also, my 2 cents, Stan Liou has made some intelligent comments well worth reading.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T05:55:46.610Z
@userLTK- Great way to answer the unanswerable, No deception or fictional facts.Everything doesn't have to be written in stone.
user5434678
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T21:34:04.317Z
@userLTK if the light and gravity is a wave they have transmission medium like the wave in the sea have transmission medium -water. In the water wave the particles have rotation direction too and one wave reaches the beach on the principle of domino (the same particles hit the beach many times) we see that wave is moving but the particles not moving with wave they only hit the other particles and continue with rotation direction.
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T23:52:07.797Z
"Rotation speed can create a centripetal (centrifugal??) force opposing gravity and making things lighter," Rotation also stores energy, and energy is mass, per $E=mc^2$. A body spinning sufficiently fast will exert higher gravity, e.g. a slowly-spinning neutron star will have a weaker gravitational pull than equivalent neutron star that spins very fast.
SF.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T02:29:39.693Z
@user3252198  I understand what you're saying about the behavior of a water wave but I'm not sure how that applies to a light wave.   I'm also not sure that light passes through a medium at all, or if it does, it's a "field", which is a different kind of medium. .   That gets a little complicated   http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/109982/how-is-a-vacuum-able-to-propagate-light
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T02:59:24.180Z
@SF, Relativistic mass to rotational energy.   :-)   I like that, but it's mostly quite small.   I'm also not sure that what you suggest is realistic.   Probably better for a separate question though.   Oh, and it's centrifugal.   I looked http://bhoffert.faculty.noctrl.edu/HST263/Centripetal.Centrifugal.Green.png  I've edited my post.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T08:17:55.103Z
@SF why you are on the ground if the centrifugal force opposing gravity is bigger :) mass stores energy true but to exist mass its need to have gravity and correct me if its not true but I think that gravity on the Earth will be stronger if the rotation speed is bigger ??
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T08:21:22.587Z
I think that only pure mind without knowledge can answer of this question..
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T14:33:49.630Z
@user3252198: This is only true if you are moving with surface of the body. Not if you remain suspended over a spinning body, not moving with it. Say, a meteorite incoming from outside the system, aimed straight at the center of our neutron star, will be falling faster if the star is spinning faster. Also after a certain threshold, the gain of mass with kinetic energy will outpace the centrifugal force, that's why you can't orbit a black hole below the event horizon, say, enter an elliptical orbit that crosses the event horizon and emerges on the other side.
SF.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-08T11:41:59.143Z
@SF thanks for the detailed explanation. My understanding of this: Its have threshold between two forces gravity and centrifugal and distance from planet to this threshold depend of the planet rotation speed. Maybe the black hole is simple planet with high rotation? its have some flow from the space to the center of planet and particles of this flow is the transmission medium of the gravity. If its true the planet mass will be increased and the rotation decreased in time ?
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-08T12:13:15.037Z
If you remain suspended over a spinning body you are part of this body like the Moon is suspended over Earth. This is stable connection and stores energy and this energy can be released only if the Moon changes it direction of movement and cross the threshold of the Earth.. this is the same as the chemistry..
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-08T13:17:51.703Z
@user3252198: Don't make any such assumptions about black holes. They are objects that defy any common sense, and definitely nothing as simple as "fast-spinning planets". The General Relativity effects around them completely warp our vision letting you see 360 degrees around the black hole, make fast-moving objects seem to freeze in time, tidal forces rip anything apart into subatomic particles, and that's even before you cross the event horizon. What's below? How about "it spins, but has no angular velocity" for starters?
SF.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-08T14:12:30.030Z
Maybe things about black holes will be clear if some black hole turns into planet just after 10000000000 years :) @SP don`t forget that General and Special Relativity theory are written before 100 years. For the first time theory its good but many peoples looks on this theory like a law.. but its theory only :)
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-08T14:48:46.710Z
@SP don`t you thing that "centrifugal force" is circle here not line in result of the gravity force. The planet have particles that all moving in one direction but from the space have non stop moving other particles. They all moving with direction center of the planet and return back only if in their way stand body in orbit. Can you guest what would be the movement of the body in orbit line (from centrifugal) or circle :)
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T04:53:21.783Z
2016-02-07T03:00:58.260Z
2016-02-07T03:00:58.260Z
userLTK
<p>Gravitational force is particle or wave? I know that gravitation depend of the mass and the rotation speed but what is the transmission medium of this wave the same like transmission medium of the light ?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T01:33:27.373Z
Gravitational force is mediated by a massless spin-2 field that couples to energy, similarly to how electromagnetic force is mediated by a massless spin-1 field that couples to electric charge. That much has been understood for quite a long time now. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're intending to ask.
Stan Liou
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T02:51:17.267Z
@TheVoid What are you on about? Gravity has been described by a massless spin-2 field since 1915. I recommend you check e.g. Feynman's Lectures on Gravitation (initially done in 1962), which includes an argument that a massless spin-2 field implies the equivalence principle (the pillar of general relativity) for point particles or bulk unpolarized matter. This was shown more rigorously using quantum field theory by Weinberg in 1972. These things are well-known features of gravity.
Stan Liou
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T02:59:58.583Z
@TheVoid Of course it would (as strange as such taking such a shape or being able to hold it against its own gravity would be). But your question is such a bizarre non-sequitur that I suspect you're just trolling me, so I won't bother replying to you further.
Stan Liou
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T19:49:08.867Z
@TheVoid General Relativity describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy.
By the way, GR has proven incredibly accurate and calling it "just a theory" is extremely misleading. Theories are what science is based upon; there are no certainties. GR is the closest thing to reality that we have right now, since it's so precise.
Sir Cumference
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-06T21:55:02.380Z
My question is what is the transmission medium of the gravity and do its have some name ?
sytolk
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T03:19:49.723Z
@user3252198 you might want to check out these, even if they're on light not gravity.   http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/19670/why-dont-electromagnetic-waves-require-a-medium   and http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/109982/how-is-a-vacuum-able-to-propagate-light   I haven't seen a specific question on gravity and it's theoretical medium, it's probably hard to answer with certainty without a more complete model on gravity, but I don't think fundamental particle waves need mediums.  My limited understanding is that they don't, or perhaps, the medium is the field.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-02-07T08:06:41.503Z
@userLTK Einstein have 2 theory of relativity special for physics (level atoms) and general for astronomy (level planets). The planets including all -> level atoms and next level with light and gravity too. In Astronomy planets are the big level that we know and the things here moving slower that the next level (atoms). But in Astronomy we can view the result of moving of all levels -planets with atoms with light and gravity. But Einstein theory is looks like mythology for me this is the reason that I`m looking for the answers on this level :)
sytolk
<gravity>
what is gravitational force?
sytolk
# what is gravitational force?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-02-05)

Gravitational force is particle or wave? I know that gravitation depend of the mass and the rotation speed but what is the transmission medium of this wave the same like transmission medium of the light ?

**Tags:** gravity
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Gravitational force is mediated by a massless spin-2 field that couples to energy, similarly to how electromagnetic force is mediated by a massless spin-1 field that couples to electric charge. That much has been understood for quite a long time now. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're intending to ask.  
> **username_1**: @TheVoid What are you on about? Gravity has been described by a massless spin-2 field since 1915. I recommend you check e.g. Feynman's Lectures on Gravitation (initially done in 1962), which includes an argument that a massless spin-2 field implies the equivalence principle (the pillar of general relativity) for point particles or bulk unpolarized matter. This was shown more rigorously using quantum field theory by Weinberg in 1972. These things are well-known features of gravity.  
> **username_1**: @TheVoid Of course it would (as strange as such taking such a shape or being able to hold it against its own gravity would be). But your question is such a bizarre non-sequitur that I suspect you're just trolling me, so I won't bother replying to you further.  
> **username_2**: @TheVoid General Relativity describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy. By the way, GR has proven incredibly accurate and calling it "just a theory" is extremely misleading. Theories are what science is based upon; there are no certainties. GR is the closest thing to reality that we have right now, since it's so precise.  
> **username_0**: My question is what is the transmission medium of the gravity and do its have some name ?  
> **username_3**: @user3252198 you might want to check out these, even if they're on light not gravity.   http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/19670/why-dont-electromagnetic-waves-require-a-medium   and http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/109982/how-is-a-vacuum-able-to-propagate-light   I haven't seen a specific question on gravity and it's theoretical medium, it's probably hard to answer with certainty without a more complete model on gravity, but I don't think fundamental particle waves need mediums.  My limited understanding is that they don't, or perhaps, the medium is the field.  
> **username_0**: @userLTK Einstein have 2 theory of relativity special for physics (level atoms) and general for astronomy (level planets). The planets including all -> level atoms and next level with light and gravity too. In Astronomy planets are the big level that we know and the things here moving slower that the next level (atoms). But in Astronomy we can view the result of moving of all levels -planets with atoms with light and gravity. But Einstein theory is looks like mythology for me this is the reason that I`m looking for the answers on this level :)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-02-06. Score: 5

As a hobbyist, I'll give a limited answer.

> Gravitational force is particle or wave?

Until we actually find out what gravity is, the safe answer here is that we don't know, but it's probably a wave and a particle. Most (perhaps all) fundamental particles in quantum physics are waves and particles. Light for example, Electrons too, though we might think of an electron as a particle, it's wave properties are easily demonstrated, and wave properties of protons can be demonstrated as well. There's a ton of stuff that can be googled on the wave-particle duality. Here's [one](http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/uncertainty/uncertainty3.html).

It's unclear exactly what fundamental particles "are" so saying a fundamental particle is "this or that" is a bit iffy since we can't see them. We can only study how they behave. Gravity, if it's a fundamental particle, which it probably is, it should be both a wave and a particle, and a field. I know, that's a little hard to think about. We don't get to have many tangible answers in quantum physics.

> I know that gravitation depend of the mass and the rotation speed

Gravity depends on mass. Period. Rotation speed can creates a centrifugal force opposing gravity and making things lighter, but that isn't gravity. The gravity is still 100% governed by mass.

> what is the transmission medium of this wave the same like
> transmission medium of the light ?

Light (as far as I know) doesn't require a transmission medium. Gravity shouldn't either. Sound waves require a medium but light and gravity can pass through empty space.

If you have more specific questions, you might have better luck on Physics rather than Astronomy. Also, my 2 cents, Stan Liou has made some intelligent comments well worth reading.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: @userLTK- Great way to answer the unanswerable, No deception or fictional facts.Everything doesn't have to be written in stone.  
> **username_0**: @userLTK if the light and gravity is a wave they have transmission medium like the wave in the sea have transmission medium -water. In the water wave the particles have rotation direction too and one wave reaches the beach on the principle of domino (the same particles hit the beach many times) we see that wave is moving but the particles not moving with wave they only hit the other particles and continue with rotation direction.  
> **username_5**: "Rotation speed can create a centripetal (centrifugal??) force opposing gravity and making things lighter," Rotation also stores energy, and energy is mass, per $E=mc^2$. A body spinning sufficiently fast will exert higher gravity, e.g. a slowly-spinning neutron star will have a weaker gravitational pull than equivalent neutron star that spins very fast.  
> **username_3**: @user3252198  I understand what you're saying about the behavior of a water wave but I'm not sure how that applies to a light wave.   I'm also not sure that light passes through a medium at all, or if it does, it's a "field", which is a different kind of medium. .   That gets a little complicated   http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/109982/how-is-a-vacuum-able-to-propagate-light  
> **username_3**: @SF, Relativistic mass to rotational energy.   :-)   I like that, but it's mostly quite small.   I'm also not sure that what you suggest is realistic.   Probably better for a separate question though.   Oh, and it's centrifugal.   I looked http://bhoffert.faculty.noctrl.edu/HST263/Centripetal.Centrifugal.Green.png  I've edited my post.  
> **username_0**: @SF why you are on the ground if the centrifugal force opposing gravity is bigger :) mass stores energy true but to exist mass its need to have gravity and correct me if its not true but I think that gravity on the Earth will be stronger if the rotation speed is bigger ??  
> **username_0**: I think that only pure mind without knowledge can answer of this question..  
> **username_5**: @user3252198: This is only true if you are moving with surface of the body. Not if you remain suspended over a spinning body, not moving with it. Say, a meteorite incoming from outside the system, aimed straight at the center of our neutron star, will be falling faster if the star is spinning faster. Also after a certain threshold, the gain of mass with kinetic energy will outpace the centrifugal force, that's why you can't orbit a black hole below the event horizon, say, enter an elliptical orbit that crosses the event horizon and emerges on the other side.  
> **username_0**: @SF thanks for the detailed explanation. My understanding of this: Its have threshold between two forces gravity and centrifugal and distance from planet to this threshold depend of the planet rotation speed. Maybe the black hole is simple planet with high rotation? its have some flow from the space to the center of planet and particles of this flow is the transmission medium of the gravity. If its true the planet mass will be increased and the rotation decreased in time ?  
> **username_0**: If you remain suspended over a spinning body you are part of this body like the Moon is suspended over Earth. This is stable connection and stores energy and this energy can be released only if the Moon changes it direction of movement and cross the threshold of the Earth.. this is the same as the chemistry..  
> **username_5**: @user3252198: Don't make any such assumptions about black holes. They are objects that defy any common sense, and definitely nothing as simple as "fast-spinning planets". The General Relativity effects around them completely warp our vision letting you see 360 degrees around the black hole, make fast-moving objects seem to freeze in time, tidal forces rip anything apart into subatomic particles, and that's even before you cross the event horizon. What's below? How about "it spins, but has no angular velocity" for starters?  
> **username_0**: Maybe things about black holes will be clear if some black hole turns into planet just after 10000000000 years :) @SP don`t forget that General and Special Relativity theory are written before 100 years. For the first time theory its good but many peoples looks on this theory like a law.. but its theory only :)  
> **username_0**: @SP don`t you thing that "centrifugal force" is circle here not line in result of the gravity force. The planet have particles that all moving in one direction but from the space have non stop moving other particles. They all moving with direction center of the planet and return back only if in their way stand body in orbit. Can you guest what would be the movement of the body in orbit line (from centrifugal) or circle :)  

---

