Gravity Revisited: Earth-Moon & Earth-Sun Comparisons

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Restructure
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity
  • #31
Yes, I agree with Morberticus and Dave. You're basically saying the same thing I said in post #17. I don't even think the OP was even considering anything more than a two body problem. Using more than two bodies only serves to complicate the understanding of the universality of free fall and the equivalence principle. The EP has not been mentioned in this thread. But I think it is important to bring it up because the UFF and EP go hand in hand. I will use the following illustration:

uff_ep.gif


The dot located between m1 and m2 is the CoM. Notice that it is in the center an equal distance from m1 and m2. This tells us that the mass of m1 and m2 are equal. I cannot do animation here so you'll have to visualize the following.
Lets increase the mass of m2. Two things will happen. 1)The increase in inertial mass of m2 will cause the CoM to move to a position closer to m2. 2)The increase in gravitational mass of m2 will cause the relative acceleration of m1 and m2 toward each other to increase. Now, the equivalence principle tells us that gravitational mass is proportionally equal to inertial mass. So the shorter distance that m2 has to travel to reach the CoM (as a result of the increase in inertial mass of m2) exactly offsets the increase in acceleration (as a result of the increase in gravitational mass of m2). So the acceleration of m2 relative to the CoM remains constant, and the time that it takes to reach the CoM decreases. The only way to change the acceleration of m2 relative to CoM is to change the mass of m1.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
Hello all.

I have a question.
Has any of the above discussion been experimentally verified?
Not saying it's wrong. Just want to know.
 
  • #33
Pallidin, I deleted part of my first paragraph in post #31 because I felt some parts of it may be incorrect. However, I have a high degree of confidence with the post as it is now. Please be more specific with your question. There have been lots of experimental tests for the UFF and EP.
 
  • #34
TurtleMeister said:
There have been lots of experimental tests for the UFF and EP.

Would you be willing to be more specific as to the sources?
 
  • #35
I think http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/" has some of the most recent tests of the EP. Right off hand, I don't have a recent source for the UFF.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
OK, good read.
But, I understand that this has not been endorsed by the NSF, DOE or NASA.
Am I missing something there?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K