Is the equivalence principle related to the principle of relativity?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The equivalence principle states that all inertial objects experience the same laws of physics, meaning that one cannot distinguish between being in a rocket accelerating upwards or standing on the Earth's surface under the influence of gravity. The acceleration due to gravity on Earth is approximately 9.81 m/s², not 9.25 m/s² as initially mentioned. The principle of relativity, credited to Galileo, is distinct from the equivalence principle and addresses the uniformity of physical laws across inertial frames. Observers at or near the Earth's surface experience the same gravitational acceleration, which is consistently 1 G.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the equivalence principle in physics
  • Familiarity with the principle of relativity
  • Basic knowledge of gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s²)
  • Concept of inertial frames of reference
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between the equivalence principle and the principle of relativity
  • Study the implications of gravitational acceleration in different contexts
  • Explore the effects of free fall and weightlessness in various environments
  • Examine the historical development of gravitational theories, including contributions from Galileo and Einstein
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching gravitational concepts, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of relativity and gravity.

Hihello
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Here is what I understand of the equivalence principle. However, given that the concept is still a bit cloudy to me, please tell me if I am wrong:
The equivalence principle is a phenomena where all inertial objects experience the same laws of physics. In other words, if you were going at constant speed, you would not be able to tell that you were moving unless there is a window because the laws of physics(ex. throwing an object in the air and expecting it to not fall forward) is the same. The equivalence principle states that if we were to close the window, we could not tell if we were accelerating upwards in a rocket or towards the Earth if the acceleration is 9.25. Only in cases where we accelerate to more than such, such as in a free-falling elevator, would we be able to tell that we are moving. Astronauts in space likewise experience weightlessness because all objects are free-falling together, and hence, there is nothing to push against them so they can " feel" gravity.
This can all be used to explain why the apple " knows" to fall downwards. Gravity causes the apple to fall towards the Earth at 9.25 so it would meet my head. If we were all experiencing free-fall and are experiencing acceleration at the same rate, the apple would not " fall" downwards.
If all that I said above was correct(which very likely it is not), does that mean our rates of acceleration/gravity on Earth is different?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Hihello:

I think for the most part, what you wrote is correct. However, there are a few places where I have made suggestions for changes.

Hihello said:
if you were going at constant speed, you would not be able to tell that you were moving unless there is a window (ex. throwing an object in the air and expecting it to not fall forward) is the same. because the laws of physics
I think this needs a bit of editing.
(1) "going at constant speed" fails to eliminate moving at constant speed in a train along a track on the Earth's surface.
(2) "unless there is a window" fails to require that there is something useful to see outside the window.

Hihello said:
if we were accelerating upwards in a rocket or towards the Earth if the acceleration is 9.25
(3) "upwards in a rocket" creates an ambiguity. I suggest "in a rocket upward".
(4) I think "9.25" is intended to refer to the Earth's acceleration of gravity. I suggest you substitute "9.81 m/s2".

Hihello said:
we accelerate to more than such, such as in a free-falling elevator, would we be able to tell that we are moving.
(5) "in a free-falling elevator, would we be able to tell that we are moving" is confusing. If you are in a free falling elevator, you would not necessarily experience this as moving, since the elevator could just as well be out in deep space.

Hihello said:
If we were all experiencing free-fall and are experiencing acceleration at the same rate, the apple would not " fall" downwards
(6) I think you are confused about acceleration and free fall. You experience the Earth's gravitational acceleration when you are standing on the Earth's surface and feel the upward pressure against your feet. When you are in free fall, you do not experience this pressure, and you might be stationary in outer space, or moving at a constant speed in outer space, of accelerating towards the Earth in a falling elevator. In all these cases, you would fell the same experience.

You may also find it useful to look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle.

Regards,
Buzz
 
Hihello said:
The equivalence principle is a phenomena where all inertial objects experience the same laws of physics.
That's not the equivalence principle, it's the principle of relativity. It's many centuries older than the equivalence principle - we generally credit it to Galileo. The equivalence principle is what you say next, with one correction that I've made inline:
The equivalence principle states that if we were to close the window, we could not tell if we were accelerating upwards in a rocket or towards at rest on the surface of the Earth if the acceleration is 9.25.

does that mean our rates of acceleration/gravity on Earth is different?
It is the same, 1 G or 9.8 meters per second per second, for everything at or near the surface of the earth. Imagine an observer so far away from Earth that he can completely the effect of Earth's gravity on him. If he's watching through a powerful telescope, he will observe that everything in the vicinity of the Earth's surface is either accelerating towards the center of the Earth at 1 G or is being prevented from doing so by some opposing force (for example, it's resting on the surface of the Earth so it can't move towards the center).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
6K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K