Understanding Gravity: The Curvature of Space-Time and Kinetic Energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of gravity as described by General Relativity (GR), particularly focusing on the curvature of space-time, the concept of geodesics, and the implications of these ideas on kinetic energy and universal expansion. Participants explore theoretical aspects, clarify concepts, and pose related questions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that gravity is a result of mass curving space-time, leading to objects following geodesics, which may create the appearance of attraction to Earth.
  • Another participant emphasizes that space-time curvature is not merely a side effect but a fundamental aspect of a background independent universe, constrained by the finite speed of light.
  • A participant questions whether the initial movement through space-time implies that everything has kinetic energy, proposing that this movement could be related to universal expansion.
  • A response indicates that while all objects have a total four-velocity equal to the speed of light, the concept of kinetic energy from base movement may relate to rest mass when considering movement through time.
  • There is a discussion about whether the base movement is linked to universal expansion, with one participant suggesting that time passing for an observer is distinct from the expansion of the universe.
  • Another participant notes that the equations of GR can yield results similar to Newtonian acceleration, raising questions about the visualization of gravity's effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of gravity, the implications of space-time curvature, and the relationship between movement and kinetic energy. No consensus is reached on these complex topics.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of relating speed to other objects and the mathematical solutions of GR, including Minkowski space and the FRW model. There are limitations in fully visualizing the implications of space-time curvature and gravity's effects.

gonzo
Messages
277
Reaction score
0
I have some question that might be hard for me to phrase clearly, but I'm going to give it a try.

So, as far as I understand it, according to GR gravity is a side effect of the way mass (or mass energy, or whatever) curves space-time. So that when an object "falls" to the Earth, it isn't really being attracted to the Earth, but is just moving in a "straight line", which the Earth is also doing, and these lines (geodesics, right?) meet back up in such a way that it looks like the object is being attracted to the Earth.

Am I understanding this, more or less, so far?

It seems to me that if this understanding is correct, then it must mean that everything is moving really fast through space-time initially, right? I mean, it wouldn't matter if space was curved in such a funky way by itself, unless everything was moving with some serious speed to start with. If this is true, does this mean that everything has kinetic energy from this base movement?

A related question, is this base movement just universal expansion? Is that possible? Though if that's true, what would that mean if the universe started to slow down? And I seem to remember that gravity itself effects expansion, so that can't really be right, can it?

And a final question, if the attraction of gravity is just from bending of space time and geodesic movement, why does it cause acceleration? Or is that not something can be "visualized" in a meaningful way and just comes out of the math?

Thanks for any and all help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
GR plays off the Einstein equations. The solutions are mathematically sound. You can't talk about speed without relating it to some other object. The mathematically valid solution without any matter in the universe is called Minkowski space. The solution that includes matter is called the FRW model. Space-time curvature is not a 'side effect', it is the geometry of a background independent universe constrained by a finite speed of light.
 
gonzo said:
I have some question that might be hard for me to phrase clearly, but I'm going to give it a try.

So, as far as I understand it, according to GR gravity is a side effect of the way mass (or mass energy, or whatever) curves space-time. So that when an object "falls" to the Earth, it isn't really being attracted to the Earth, but is just moving in a "straight line", which the Earth is also doing, and these lines (geodesics, right?) meet back up in such a way that it looks like the object is being attracted to the Earth.

Am I understanding this, more or less, so far?
Yes!
gonzo said:
It seems to me that if this understanding is correct, then it must mean that everything is moving really fast through space-time initially, right? I mean, it wouldn't matter if space was curved in such a funky way by itself, unless everything was moving with some serious speed to start with. If this is true, does this mean that everything has kinetic energy from this base movement?
Yes right again - When we use four dimensions and define four-velocity through space-time by Ua = dxa/dtau then all objects have a total four-velocity equal to c. In our own frame of reference we are stationary wrt movement through space but we are all moving through time at one second per second! As across space-time a second in time is equivalent to 186,000 miles in space, we are all moving through space-time at 186,000 miles/sec the speed of light! If stationary in space this movement is entirely in the direction of the time axis, and so your "kinetic energy from this base movement" actually can be considered our 'rest' mass, the total energy we have when 'moving' through time alone.
gonzo said:
A related question, is this base movement just universal expansion? Is that possible? Though if that's true, what would that mean if the universe started to slow down? And I seem to remember that gravity itself effects expansion, so that can't really be right, can it?
No and a qualified yes! This movement for any observer in their own frame of reference is just the passing of their time. However, if you interested in Self Creation Cosmology, (page 27) I am tempted to add that in the Einstein frame of that theory the cosmological model is that of a space-like hyper-sphere with time as its radial coordinate. In this model the passing of time and the expansion of the universe are two separate ways of experiencing the same phenomenon, and your answer would be correct, except that as it is a strictly linearly expanding, or freely coasting model, the expansion does not slow down.
gonzo said:
And a final question, if the attraction of gravity is just from bending of space-time and geodesic movement, why does it cause acceleration? Or is that not something can be "visualized" in a meaningful way and just comes out of the math?
As Chronos has said the solution of the GR equations of motion results in Newtonian (almost) acceleration.

I hope this has helped.

Garth
 
Last edited:
Thanks Garth, that was tremendously helpful and clear. I think I have a much better grasp on what was confusing me now. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K