Einstein's Gravity Model: Explaining Its Creation

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Android17
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explain Gravity Model
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effectiveness of the rubber sheet analogy used to explain gravitational wells in the context of Einstein's theory of gravity. Participants explore the limitations of this analogy, particularly regarding the omission of the time dimension and the complexities of curved spacetime.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the rubber sheet analogy fails to account for the time dimension, which is crucial for understanding gravity's effects on objects moving at slow speeds relative to massive bodies.
  • Others suggest that the analogy is a poor representation of curved spacetime, as it simplifies the concept to a potential well without capturing the complexities of general relativity.
  • A participant mentions that the equation ##G^{\mu\nu}=8\pi T^{\mu\nu}## provides a more accurate description of gravity than the rubber sheet analogy, although it lacks visual appeal.
  • One participant introduces a geometric interpretation, noting that a circle drawn around a depression in the rubber sheet has a smaller circumference than expected, indicating a non-Euclidean geometry.
  • Another participant highlights that while the rubber sheet can represent potential wells in Newtonian gravity, it does not adequately illustrate how spacetime geometry creates gravity.
  • There is a mention of the Schwarzschild metric, suggesting a relationship between the rubber sheet's stretch and time dilation, but the participant expresses a desire to move away from further analogies involving the rubber sheet.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the adequacy of the rubber sheet analogy, with no consensus reached on its effectiveness in conveying the principles of general relativity.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the rubber sheet analogy, particularly its failure to incorporate the time dimension and the complexities of curved spacetime. Participants also note the challenges in visualizing the mathematical descriptions of gravity.

Android17
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
When we do the stretched rubbers he etc analogy of gravitational well, there are two differences 1) the ball moves into depression because of gravity of the earth.
2) stretched rubbersheet is physical and prevents ball from falling down while space would allow you to move anywhere as space doesn't apply a force on you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Android17 said:
the stretched rubbers he etc analogy of gravitational well

Is not a very good analogy because it leaves out the crucial time dimension. For objects moving at slow speeds relative to the massive object that is the source of gravity, the ordinary effects of gravity are best understood as affecting time, not space.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Sorcerer and Dale
Android17 said:
When we do the stretched rubbers
This is an analogy. The truth is ##G^{\mu\nu}=8\pi T^{\mu\nu}## and does not have those shortcomings, but it's difficult to make pretty graphics out of that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Sorcerer and Dale
Android17 said:
When we do the stretched rubbers he etc analogy of gravitational well,..
It's an analogy of a potential well, not of curved space-time in GR. Try this one instead:

 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Android17 and Dale
There is a third interpretation. As for a circle draw on rubber around the depression due to massive body, its periphecy is smaller than 2 pi *(radius on rubber sheet) . Geometry changed to Non-Euclid.
 
sweet springs said:
There is a third interpretation. As for a circle draw on rubber around the depression due to massive body, its periphecy is smaller than 2 pi *(radius on rubber sheet) . Geometry changed to Non-Euclid.
That is still just describing the spatial geometry, and doesn't explain gravity for which the time dimension is key.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sweet springs
Thanks. Schwartschild metric suggests that inverse of rubber stretch corresponds to time dilation, so... No, I will stop further analogy on rubber toy now.
 
sweet springs said:
Schwartschild metric suggests that inverse of rubber stretch corresponds to time dilation...
If the rubber sheet represents the potential well (as it can for Newtonian gravity too). But the sheet has no time dimension to show how space-time geometry creates gravity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sweet springs
Android17 said:
When we do the stretched rubbers he etc analogy of gravitational well, there are two differences 1) the ball moves into depression because of gravity of the earth.
2) stretched rubbersheet is physical and prevents ball from falling down while space would allow you to move anywhere as space doesn't apply a force on you.

That's quite a good analysis of why the rubber sheet is a poor analogy of curved spacetime!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K