Does the curvature of SpaceTime Disprove gravity?

TheIsland24
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Obviously not. But I am confused on this. Newtons laws of gravity did not fit with Einsteins Relativity theories because Newton said that a change in matter of an object would cause a shift to be felt by others in the universe because of the change in gravity. This would mean that the movement/ change of the gravitons would be faster than the speed of light, which isn't possible in general relativity because light is standard/constant. In order to incorporate gravity into his theory, Einstein eventually created General Relativity which says that SpaceTime is curved. Objects attempting to move in straight lines in space follow this curvature. Was Einstein saying that this curvature creates the illusion of gravity, and thus gravity did not really exist? How did saying that Space and Time were curved solve the problem of gravity in terms of Relativity that I already mentioned? The only way I can see this problem being solved is if Einstein was saying gravity didnt actually exist ( it was just objects trying to follow straight lines but actually following curved lines). I know this isn't true because curved space and time is accepted today, as well as gravity. Could someone explain PLEASE!?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are essentially correct.

If you want to think of Newton's theory of gravitation in terms of gravitons, then yes these gravitons did travel faster than the speed of light. In fact, they traveled infinitely fast because the gravitational interaction between bodies was propagated instantaneously in Newton's theory. As you say, instant transfer of information is forbidden in relativity, so this is a bit of a problem.

Einstein's theory of GR, in a sense, does say that gravity is a "fake" force. Einstein was saying that what we perceive as gravity as actually simply the product of mass warping space time and objects following their natural trajectories. It essentially replaces a traditional force (carrier particle, in the sense of the standard model) model of the gravitational interaction with a completely geometric model of gravity.
 
Thank you very much. How are both of these ideas accepted today? Obviously gravity is accepted as a force, but General Relativity is also accepted as a theory...doesnt add up in my mind.
 
See post #4 here. That thread was near the top of the first page when you created this one, so I'm surprised you didn't see it.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top