Equivalence Principle & Geometry: Ben Crowell's General Relativity

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
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