Exploring General Relativity: Bullet and Light Acceleration Discrepancy

In summary: Also note that we don't need to know how high the floor is to use equivalence. In summary, the scenario described involves a rifle barrel and a laser point aimed at a target some distance away. According to the Equivalence Principle, the bullet and the light will experience the same downward acceleration during horizontal travel. However, due to the light's faster arrival time at the target, it will fall a lesser distance, resulting in the bullet hitting the target well below the laser beam. This can also be explained by considering the scenario in a uniform gravitational field using the Equivalence Principle. The projectile will hit the target at a lower height due to its horizontal acceleration being affected by the gravitational pull. This principle can also be applied to a beam of light,
  • #1
noobphysicist
26
0
Well, here's the scenario I am particularly curious about:

A riffle barrel and a laser point directly towards a target some distance away. Now, General
relativity says that the bullet and the light experience the same downward acceleration
during horizontal travel, yet the bullet hits the target well below the laser beam.



Is it because light exhibits less gravitational forces than material objects such as a bullet? If not, then why does this happen?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Broadly speaking the light and the bullet fall the same distance in the same time. In you example the light arrives at the target in less time than the bullet, so it falls a lesser distance.
 
  • #3
noobphysicist said:
Now, General relativity says that the bullet and the light experience the same downward acceleration
during horizontal travel,
That is also what Newton says. No need to invoke GR here.

noobphysicist said:
yet the bullet hits the target well below the laser beam.
... why does this happen?
Because the light reaches the target faster, so it has less time to fall. Same with bullets of different speed. No need to consider light here.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #4
noobphysicist said:
A riffle barrel and a laser point directly towards a target some distance away. Now, General
relativity says that the bullet and the light experience the same downward acceleration
during horizontal travel, yet the bullet hits the target well below the laser beam.
I think that you are thinking of the equivalence principle, which can be somewhat loosely stated as that being at rest in a uniform gravitational field is the same as accelerating in the absence of gravity.

So consider what would happen if you are accelerating in a rocket, far away from any gravitational source. Suppose your barrel and laser are aligned exactly perpendicular to the direction of acceleration. You can easily figure out where the laser and bullet will hit. If you work it out you will get that the bullet will hit well below the laser beam.

GR says that the same is true in a uniform gravitational field.

EDIT: wow! double scooped!
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #5
DaleSpam said:
I think that you are thinking of the equivalence principle, which can be somewhat loosely stated as that being at rest in a uniform gravitational field is the same as accelerating in the absence of gravity.

So consider what would happen if you are accelerating in a rocket, far away from any gravitational source. Suppose your barrel and laser are aligned exactly perpendicular to the direction of acceleration. You can easily figure out where the laser and bullet will hit. If you work it out you will get that the bullet will hit well below the laser beam.

GR says that the same is true in a uniform gravitational field.

EDIT: wow! double scooped!

I was wondering if maybe you can expand a little on the equivalence principle and what it has to do with my example?
 
  • #6
There are lots of good sources about the equivalence principle. Here are a few:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/grel.html
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/cosmology/equivalence.html
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/equivalence_principle

About what it has to do with your example, in the OP you claimed that "General relativity says that the bullet and the light experience the same downward acceleration" which is false in general, but correct in a uniform gravitational field. Since the usual introduction to the equivalence principle is regarding a uniform gravitational field I assumed that is what you were discussing and most likely the source of your somewhat incorrect assumption in the OP.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #7
As somebody said, the easiest way to solve this problem is by using equivalence principle. Picture this in 2D. You have a horizontal floor running along X. The floor accelerates upwards at a rate of a in direction of Y. We can take an inertial frame from which we'll consider this problem the moment the projectile is fired. Initially the projectile is some height h above the floor and it travels in the X direction at velocity v. Some distance d from origin, projectile hits a wall. This happens after some time t = d/v after the projectile is fired. In that time, the floor has traveled distance at²/2. So the projectile strikes the wall at height h - ad²/(2v²). Note that because motion in X and Y are totally independent, we don't need to worry about relativity at all, so this works even for a beam of light. It will strike the wall at height h - ad²/(2c²). And if we simply substitute a uniform gravitational field for acceleration, we have that the light "drops" from h down to h - gd²/(2c²) if the beam is fired "horizontally". The only reason the bullet drops a lot more is because v << c, resulting in a much more significant drop.

P.S. It is very important that the projectile is traveling strictly in the X direction while acceleration is strictly in the Y direction. This is what allows us to make simple use of equivalence. If you try the same approach to a beam of light curved by a planet or a star, you'll end up making a mistake by a factor of 2.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person

Related to Exploring General Relativity: Bullet and Light Acceleration Discrepancy

1. What is General Relativity?

General Relativity is a theory of gravity developed by Albert Einstein in the early 20th century. It describes how the force of gravity arises from the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass and energy.

2. How does General Relativity differ from Newton's theory of gravity?

Newton's theory of gravity, also known as classical mechanics, treats gravity as a force between two objects based on their masses and the distance between them. General Relativity, on the other hand, explains gravity as the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass and energy.

3. What are some real-world applications of General Relativity?

General Relativity has many practical applications, including GPS navigation systems, which use Einstein's equations to account for the time dilation effects of gravity on satellites. It also helps us understand the behavior of black holes and the expansion of the universe.

4. Can General Relativity be tested and proven?

Yes, General Relativity has been extensively tested and has passed all experimental and observational tests to date. For example, the famous bending of light by massive objects, such as stars, has been observed and confirmed to follow the predictions of General Relativity.

5. Is General Relativity the final theory of gravity?

While General Relativity has been successful in explaining and predicting many phenomena, it is not considered the final theory of gravity. It is currently incompatible with quantum mechanics, and scientists are still working to develop a unified theory that can explain both gravity and the other fundamental forces of nature.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
356
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
647
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top