Gravity as Curvature of Spacetime: Understanding Einstein's Theory

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter EPR
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spacetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of gravity in the context of Einstein's theory of general relativity, specifically focusing on the concept of objects being "at rest" in a curved spacetime rather than falling due to a force. Participants explore the implications of this perspective through various thought experiments and examples.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that, according to Einstein, objects like a ball and a feather are not falling but are instead standing still in a local inertial frame.
  • Others clarify that "moving" through spacetime differs from moving through space, emphasizing the nature of motion in general relativity.
  • A participant introduces the idea of a second ball further from Earth, suggesting that while both balls are "standing still," their relative motion differs due to varying gravitational effects.
  • Another participant notes that an observer on Earth would perceive the balls as falling, while a freely falling observer would see them as at rest.
  • There is a discussion about tidal gravity and how it relates to the relative motion of the balls, with some participants agreeing on the frame invariance of this motion.
  • One participant expresses interest in the concept of geodesic deviation, highlighting the complexity of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the conceptual framework of objects being at rest in curved spacetime, but there are multiple competing views regarding the implications of this perspective, particularly concerning relative motion and the effects of gravity. The discussion remains unresolved on certain points.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of local inertial frames and tidal gravity, but there are limitations in fully addressing the mathematical underpinnings and assumptions related to these concepts.

EPR
Messages
440
Reaction score
105
Just wanted to point out that i have never seen a better depiction of Einsteinian gravity, if a little hard to swallow and somewhat baffling to human intuition.

In the following experiment prof. Brian Cox(he used to be on this forum?) says:

"Isaac Newton would say that the ball and the feather fall because there’s a force pulling them down: gravity,’.
But Einstein imagined the scene very differently.

"The “happiest thought of his life” [as Einstein called it] was this; the reason the bowling ball and the feather fall together is because they’re not falling.

"They’re standing still. There is no force acting on them at all."He reasoned that if you couldn’t see the background, there’d be no way of knowing that the ball and the feathers were being accelerated towards the Earth.

"So he concluded they weren’t."

So, the ball and the feather are not falling. They are standing still. What moves is the observer through 4D spacetime experiencing the curvature of spacetime as gravity.

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Moderator's note: Moved thread to relativity forum.
 
EPR said:
the ball and the feather are not falling. They are standing still

Yes. More precisely, one can always adopt a local inertial frame in which the ball and the feather are at rest.

EPR said:
What moves is the observer through 4D spacetime experiencing the curvature of spacetime as gravity.

Note that this is a different meaning of the word "move". "Moving" through spacetime is not the same as moving through space.
 
EPR said:
So, the ball and the feather are not falling. They are standing still.

Here's the thing. Imagine another ball much further from the Earth. It, too, is "standing still". But, gravity is weaker further from the Earth, hence, relative to the Earth, the second ball is not accelerating as fast as the first.

The two balls, therefore, are both standing still yet moving relative to each other.

Interesting!
 
kent davidge said:
an observer standing on Earth would detect this relative motion of the balls and deduce they are falling in a gravitational field?

however for an observer freely falling with the balls they are both at rest

No. The relative motion of the balls in the case @PeroK described is frame invariant. It is a manifestation of tidal gravity, aka spacetime curvature.
 
PeterDonis said:
No. The relative motion of the balls in the case @PeroK described is frame invariant. It is a manifestation of tidal gravity, aka spacetime curvature.
ah, ok. the accelerating frame (according to earth) of the freely falling observer can have only one of the balls at rest at a time. correct?
 
kent davidge said:
the accelerating frame (according to earth) of the freely falling observer can have only one of the balls at rest at a time. correct?

Yes.
 
PeroK said:
The two balls, therefore, are both standing still yet moving relative to each other. Interesting!
Gotta love geodesic deviation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K