Thread 16763003

Why don't we represent space-time as a force? For example, if object A is X distance from object B, and we need to expend Y energy to move it X distance and only X distance within a given time frame, it seems pretty logical that we can model "distance" as a force that we're counter-acting through acceleration and deceleration.

>>16763003 (OP)
Space and time is not force, they are fundamental base units of physical quantity while force is a derivation of combinations of fundamental quantities, 1N of force is 1 kg·m·s−2.

>model "distance" as a force that we're counter-acting through acceleration and deceleration.
That is not what distance is, though, distance is the second integral of acceleration with respect to time, distance is the fundamental unit while velocity and acceleration are derivatives with respect to time, force doesn't come into play until mass is added to the acceleration.

>Why don't we represent space-time as a force
We do. That's weight.

>>16764419
No, weight is mass-gravity, has nothing to do with space (density is mass-space) or time (velocity is space-time).

>>16764431
>No, weight is mass-gravity
Gravity is acceleration caused by space-time curvature.

Saying it has nothing to do with space or time is like saying water has nothing to do with hydrogen or oxygen.

>>16764990
>Gravity is...
Gravity is an attractive force localized to massive objects.
That it may be real or apparent has not been proven. You have not made a statement of fact.

>>16764990
>acceleration
Acceleration is a second order derivative, it is not a fundamental measure of space nor time, it is just a way to relatively compare different bodies of mass.