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.
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
The Poynting vector is a definition, that is supposed to represent the energy flow at each point. Unfortunately, the only observable effect caused by the Poynting vector is through the energy variation in a volume subject to an energy flux through its surface, that is, the Poynting theorem. As a curl could be added to the Poynting vector without changing the Poynting theorem, it can not be decided by EM only that this should be the actual flow of energy at each point. Feynman, commenting...
Back
Top