Equivalence Principle Misunderstanding?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the nuances of Einstein's equivalence principle, specifically addressing the distinction between gravitational fields and accelerating reference frames. Participants argue that tidal effects present in gravitational fields serve as a differentiator, suggesting that the principle's applicability is limited to local experiments involving single fundamental particles. The conversation highlights the importance of precise definitions, particularly regarding the term "local," and its implications for understanding general relativity (GR) and Newtonian physics. A recommended resource for further reading is a paper from Caltech that discusses the local validity of the equivalence principle.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's equivalence principle
  • Familiarity with general relativity (GR) and special relativity (SR)
  • Knowledge of tidal effects in gravitational fields
  • Basic comprehension of Rindler coordinates and their application
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the local validity of the equivalence principle in general relativity
  • Explore the implications of tidal effects in gravitational fields
  • Learn about Rindler coordinates and their significance in accelerating frames
  • Read the recommended paper from Caltech on the equivalence principle
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of general relativity, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of gravitational theory and its implications in modern physics.

  • #31
Austin0 said:
Hi I have related question. Were the Rindler coordinates developed in GR from the equations there and then exported to an accelerating system in SR or is it the other way around?
I thought I read that the gamma relation to potential altitude was derived from calculations in the context of SR and were part of the process of formulating GR?.
Thanks
I did a internet search but failed to find a single reference to when Rindler actually introduced his coordinate system. If they had been developed before Einstein introduced GR in 1915, they would have provided a clue to expect a coordinate singularity or event horizon for a black hole in the GR solutions. Personally I find it fascinating that SR and the equivalence principle predicts event horizons. Unfortunately, the role of Rindler coordinates in the development of GR does not seem to get much of a mention in the historical records (or I am looking in the wrong places).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
DaleSpam said:
I think that uniform means that the field corresponds to the field which would be considered uniform historically, I.e. In Newtonian gravity. They didn't attempt to reconcile it here, merely presented it as an accepted meaning.

I have been wondering if a uniform field implies a field in which neighbouring vertical lines (as measured by plumb bobs) are parallel?
 
  • #33
yuiop said:
I did a internet search but failed to find a single reference to when Rindler actually introduced his coordinate system. If they had been developed before Einstein introduced GR in 1915, they would have provided a clue to expect a coordinate singularity or event horizon for a black hole in the GR solutions. Personally I find it fascinating that SR and the equivalence principle predicts event horizons. Unfortunately, the role of Rindler coordinates in the development of GR does not seem to get much of a mention in the historical records (or I am looking in the wrong places).
Rindler coordinates are named after Wolfgang Rindler who wasn't even born until 1924, but (if the entirely unsourced Wikipedia article is to be believed(?)) was the person who invented the term "event horizon".
 
  • #34
I'm uncertain about terminology - I believe Rindler in his GR textbook says that Rindler coordinates are not a "uniform" "gravitational field".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K