Equivalence Principle & Geometry: Ben Crowell's General Relativity

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the necessity of the equivalence principle in the geometric treatment of gravitation as presented in Ben Crowell's "General Relativity." The equivalence principle asserts that inertial mass and gravitational mass are equivalent, which is crucial for a geometric theory where objects launched from the same point and velocity must follow identical paths. If different materials exhibited varying ratios of inertial and gravitational masses, their trajectories would diverge, contradicting the geometric framework. Thus, the equivalence principle is fundamental for ensuring that geometry alone dictates gravitational behavior.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the equivalence principle in physics
  • Familiarity with Newtonian physics, specifically the equations of motion
  • Basic knowledge of geometric theories in physics
  • Concept of inertial and gravitational mass
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the equivalence principle in general relativity
  • Explore the mathematical formulation of gravitational theories
  • Investigate the differences between inertial and gravitational mass
  • Learn about the role of geometry in modern physics, particularly in general relativity
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators in general relativity, and researchers interested in the foundational principles of gravitational theories will benefit from this discussion.

checksix
Messages
15
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
why does geometric treatment of gravitation require equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass?
In the first sentence of Chapter 2 in Ben Crowell's "General Relativity" he states:

"The geometrical treatment of space, time, and gravity only requires as its basis the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass".

This is stated as if it's an obvious fact, but I don't understand why. Why does a geometric treatment of gravitation require the equivalence principle? I must be missing something obvious. What am I missing here?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
checksix said:
Why does a geometric treatment of gravitation require the equivalence principle? I must be missing something obvious. What am I missing here?
In Newtonian physics ##F=m_ia##, where ##m_i## is the inertial mass, and ##F=GMm_g/r^2##, where ##m_g## is the gravitational mass. Hence ##a\propto(m_g/m_i)##. One could imagine two materials that have different ratios of inertial and gravitational masses and hence that they would follow different paths even if launched from the same place at the same velocity.

But a geometric theory requires that two objects launched from the same place at the same velocity follow the same path. If they don't then it isn't just geometry that matters - what the objects are made of matters also. Hence we require that for a geometric theory ##m_g/m_i## is equal for all objects and we are free to pick units so that it is one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72, PeterDonis, A.T. and 1 other person
Got it. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
5K