My theory of gravitation (radiant pressure)

Lasers are used to propel satellites, so light (radiant pressure) exerts force.

The cosmos emits radiant pressure from all directions & mass hit from all directions turns into a sphere.

Large masses shield smaller masses from radiant pressure and objects move towards the place with less pressure.

I don’t have the exact opacity per millimeter statistics, but I’ve ordered a few materials from least opaque to most opaque which coincidentally ordered them from lightest to heaviest too.

Weight per ft3:
Air = .08 lb per ft3
Water = 62 lb per ft3
Steel = 489 lb per ft3

My theory is that material weight is caused by its opacity (and reflectivity) catching the force of radiant pressures (light force) from the cosmos like a solar sail.

It’s a testable theory… Perhaps a lead chamber of extreme thickness could block out enough electromagnetic radiation to reduce gravity inside the room by a measurable amount.

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

The nearest significant radiator of electromagnetic radiation is the Sun. There may be other radiant pressures from the cosmos, but they pale by comparison (no pun intended).

Question: If the Earth blocks the energy from the Sun, shouldn’t my weight change as the Earth rotates?

If ‘object moves toward weakened pressure’ (the shadow side) the earth orbit should at the very least be moving us away from the sun rather than getting closer. The sun should be pushing us off into the darkest place in the universe.

@Box Perhaps the radiant pressure coming from the cosmos into our solar system is stronger than the radiant pressure emitted by the Sun.

Either way, your weight would change from day to night.

@jimhami42 Perhaps the Sun doesn’t emit enough radiant pressure to notably push us onto Earth’s surface, but the 9,096 visible stars emit enough radiant pressure to push us onto Earth. The Sun emits 99% visible light, infrared, and ultraviolet light, but the gamma rays from other stars are millions of times stronger. But yes, when the Sun is shielding the Earth from cosmic radiant pressure in the daytime, then it should reduce the downwards thrust applied to us.

Therefore making this an exercise in futility.

Instead of defining the kilogram with a perfect weight (which changes weight depending on the planet it’s on), you could define the kilogram with the material’s light-matter interaction properties (which stay the same on every planet).

My point being that it would be impossible to define the weight of a kilogram so specifically if it changed when the sun went down.

Well, the Earth’s gravity is variable depending on many factors, such as the position of the Moon and density of materials underground. For example, the tide is usually higher on a full Moon. Perhaps the tide isn’t higher in the daytime because of the radiant pressure emitted from the Sun.

I’ll bow out from this thread now.


Yes, it is. You should conduct some tests to satisfy yourself about this. One would be to stand on a scale in the dark.

Movement derived from light like the example of a solar sail (photons bouncing off and transferring some momentum to an object they hit) is true and very cool technology but a distinct and understood process. In fact the only reason solar sails are a viable means of propelling satellites is because within our solar system the light from the sun is a single source of power, if there was equal light shining on both sides of the sail it would not go anywhere. So it’s because the sun overpowers the rest of the universe in our little corner that this works.


The cosmic radiant pressure shines on all sides of the solar sail, so it doesn’t move anywhere (except inwards).

When you apply the Sun’s radiant pressure to a still object, then it moves away from the Sun’s thrust.

P.S. As @RTCool said, the force from typical lights is extremely weak, so weighing myself in the dark wouldn’t make a very noticeable difference. The combined force emitted by all the stars in the cosmos surrounding us is much stronger.

Where did the GIF of the laser pushing sled come from?

Quite a while a go, I figured out how tiny that force is. Back in college, I calculated the force of beam of light from a 4 watt laser on a mirror in two ways, IIRC, classical mechanics and quantum. If you want to see how in classical, it looks like this:

It says in the end, 2.67x10e-8 Newtons, “quite a challenge to measure.”


It came from Wikipedia.

I’m really bad at math, but do you by any chance know how to calculate the amount of radiant pressure the Sun receives from all the stars in the cosmos? I’m curious to know if it’s a small amount of pressure or a large amount of pressure. Your calculations are impressive!

1 Like

Another alternative theory …

In electrical and magnetic theory, like charges repel and opposites attract. In the case of electricity, Coulombs Law computes the force (F) as the product of the charges on the particles divided by the square of the distance between them (the Inverse Square Law):


If the particles are the same polarity, the force is repelling; if they are opposite polarity, the force attracts.

Magnetism behaves very similarly. The force (F) is computed by the product of point magnetic charges divided by the square of the distance between them:


Similar to electrical and magnetic forces, the force (F) of gravity is also dependent on the product of the masses of two particles and the inverse square of the distance separating them:


The interesting thing about gravity, however, is that “like” masses attract. This would seem to imply that anti-masses would also attract each other and that a mass and an anti-mass would naturally repel one another (i.e., your antigravity). However, if unlike masses repel, any anti-mass would be far, far away from the ordinary matter that we all know and love.

It’s fascinating how all three forces have the same general form of the force equation. This could seduce someone into believing that there is some mystical relationship between magnetism, gravity, and electricity. However, it’s important to remember that the equations mimic reality and not the other way around :wink:

1 Like

If the total of light from all the stars was anywhere near as great as that from the sun, the sky would be brightly lit all of the time. There would be no night sky.

Here’s a reasonable answer from Quora:

1 Like

The sky is brightly lit all the time, but by the invisible spectrum of light. Also, certain types of invisible rays have more thrust than visible light.
Infrared Photograph (presumably) at Night

Photo source link

The visible spectrum is only a small percentage of the total light emitted from stars.

Photo Source Link

Does anyone know how to convert radiant flux into radiant pressure?
I found a luminous flux to radiant pressure calculator, but luminous flux doesn’t measure the entire spectrum. Radiant flux measures the entire spectrum. Also, I want to know the average radiant flux per solar mass in the universe & Earth’s average distance from all the solar masses in the observable universe, so I can calculate the radiant pressure Earth is receiving from intergalactic photons.

This discussion brings to mind the lyrics of a song from 1968. I was a little younger then and a number of us speculated endlessly about the true nature of the Universe. Much has changed since then. Most recently, the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Rainer Weiss, Kip Thorne and Barry Barish for their role in the detection of gravitational waves (which were only first confirmed in 2015).

Some of your ideas may sound unorthodox, but so did many other ideas in my childhood (we believed that there were nine planets in the Solar System! How silly!). The only thing that can realistically be concluded is that we don’t really know how the Universe truly works (IMHO).

Keep searching for answers, @Forestr. The truth is out there! :slight_smile:

PS: I’m pretty sure that the photograph of the tree is in full daylight.

1 Like

which is already well known


is not really new at all