Math Applying Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the implications of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity (GR) in relation to Newtonian mechanics, particularly regarding the calculation of gravitational effects. It clarifies that while Newtonian mechanics approximates gravity as a constant force (9.8 m/s²), this is only valid under specific conditions. The conversation emphasizes that GR provides a more accurate framework for understanding gravitational interactions through concepts like the geodesic equation, which describes the paths of objects in a gravitational field. The discussion also highlights that Newtonian mechanics remains effective for many practical applications despite its limitations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian mechanics and gravitational force
  • Familiarity with Einstein's Theory of General Relativity
  • Basic knowledge of calculus and differential equations
  • Awareness of the geodesic equation in GR
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the geodesic equation in General Relativity
  • Explore the differences between Newtonian mechanics and General Relativity
  • Review Carroll's lecture notes on General Relativity for deeper insights
  • Investigate the implications of gravitational force variations in different contexts
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators in advanced mechanics, and researchers interested in the applications of General Relativity in modern physics.

AJ Allen
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Just a quick question. I've recently thought about the various equations I'm learning about calculating velocity or vertical motion and have wondered that sense these equations are using Gravity as a constant force (9.8m/s^2) Is it not true that Einsteins' theory would denounce this idea and solve these types of problems in a whole different way.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[first of all, to be precise, what you give is the acceleration and not the force]

Now, in general the constant force that you are talking about is not even true for the Newtonian mechanics. Gravitational force there follows the inverse squared distance law. At small trajectories then you can consider the force to be constant [as an approximation].
Also Newtonian mechanics are an approximation of general relativity for a weak force and low speeds...

GR then, would just add up corrections to these solutions...now whether these corrections are important or not, is a matter of the wanted accuracy/precision of your measurements. If the corrections were actually large, Newtonian mechanics wouldn't have survived for 400 years.
 
AJ Allen said:
Just a quick question. I've recently thought about the various equations I'm learning about calculating velocity or vertical motion and have wondered that sense these equations are using Gravity as a constant force (9.8m/s^2) Is it not true that Einsteins' theory would denounce this idea and solve these types of problems in a whole different way.

Newtonian theory doesn't really predict a "constant force" for gravity either, you can approximate the force of gravity on the Earth as a constant as long as your distance from the Earth's center doesn't vary much.

GR wouldn't exactly "denounce" the idea, but it would calculate things in ways that would be unfamiliar if you haven't studied GR. One way of computing the path of an object under no non-gravitational forces would be to use the geodesic equation. There are a coupe of ways of arriving at the geodesic equation which are equivalent in GR (though they are some circumstances in which these two ways are not equivalent). One computes geodesics as paths that maximize (more properly, extremize) proper time, another calculates them via techniques of parallel transport. The details are probably not going to make sense without a great deal of mathematical background, I'll refer you to Caroll's GR lecture notes http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll3/Carroll3.html for more details with no guarantee that they'll be at a comprehensible level for you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K