I How Does the Rain Frame Affect Perception of a Ball Falling Off a Cliff?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter FallenApple
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ball Falling
FallenApple
Messages
564
Reaction score
61
Shellframe.gif


So a ball is rolling off a cliff. The red is the proper acceleration and the blue is the geometric acceleration. How is it in the rain frame that the surface is moving down initially?

Consider the situation where a rain drop falls straight down, with no ball rolling, just the ground right below. When the raindrop falls, since gravity is a pseudo force, we can consider the raindrop as stationary and the floor as accelerating upwards to meet the raindrop. This makes sense because the surface of floor will have an unbalanced pressure from the bottom pushing to the top, making the patch on the surface have a proper acceleration vector of up, accelerating it though spacetime to meet the rain drop. Hence from the rains perspective, the ground needs to be seen moving up.

So why all of the sudden, when there is a ball rolling off of a cliff, the situation is changed? What if the ball is just not rolling?, then the ground would be accelerating away from the raindrop forever, which doesn't make sense.

Is it because the water drop has to hit the floor of the top of the cliff after the ball has fallen off in order for the whole frame to be internal? So while the water is in free fall, the ball still needs to fall off first. Could this mean that the whole floor has to move away to make sure that the ball leaves the cliff before the floor converges with the raindrop in spacetime?

Here is the site

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_acceleration
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you read the note below the image?
 
Orodruin said:
Did you read the note below the image?
Yes. But it didn't explain why from the viewpoint of the rain, the floor must accelerate down first.
 
FallenApple said:
Yes. But it didn't explain why from the viewpoint of the rain, the floor must accelerate down first.
As said in the note, it is not the frame of a rain drop, rather it is a frame of a free falling ball that starts moving upwards in the Earth frame.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
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
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...
Back
Top