GR/SR Space-Time: Explaining Gravitation and its Geodesics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michamus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Space-time
Michamus
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
Hello everyone,
I am a self taught (dare I say Physicist?). I have been struggling with a specific concept of GR/SR. This concept is "Gravitation" and it's explanation. As I understand it, classic Newtonian gravity in which mass attracts to other mass is not technically correct. There are "geodesics" in space-time that objects of mass follow. I have two questions in reference to this concept.
1) Why does space-time even bend for massive objects? In Illustration 1a I have provided my conceptualization of the "Rubber sheet" of space time.
[View 1a]
GR-Spacetime-nobend.jpg


This is what I would initially view the rubber sheet as. Now the trouble I am having is why would the sheet bend? What compels the massive objects to bend this sheet?


2)In the event that space-time does bend (perhaps as volume displacement?) why would a lesser object (B) be compelled to move toward the more massive object (A) given a scenario in which Object B has no momentum (velocity)?

[View 2a] [/color]
GR-Spacetime.jpg

As I understand it, in a zero-G environment neither object would move regardless of the curve in the rubber sheet. What makes space-time different?


I look forward to your replies as these are questions I have never had properly satisfied.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Michamus said:
1) Why does space-time even bend for massive objects?
Curved spacetime is just a model to describe how massive objects affect their surroundings. The why-question cannot be answered without creating the next why-question.

Michamus said:
2)In the event that space-time does bend (perhaps as volume displacement?) why would a lesser object (B) be compelled to move toward the more massive object (A) given a scenario in which Object B has no momentum (velocity)?
Very well observed :smile:. The very popular marbles-rolling-on-a-rubber-sheet-analogy is misleading, because the rubber sheet represents curved space not curved spacetime. To understand the difference look here:
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/demoweb..._and_general_relativity/curved_spacetime.html

And then check out the links I gave in this post:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1557122

And then ask further questions, if any.
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...
Back
Top