Relativity versus Newtonian gravity

AI Thread Summary
Gravity in general relativity (GR) is explained as the bending of spacetime by energy, rather than the Newtonian concept of mass. The stress-energy tensor, which incorporates energy density, momentum, and stress, is fundamental to understanding gravitational effects in GR. Velocity does play a role in the equations of GR through the stress-energy tensor, which accounts for the energy and momentum of moving objects. This explains why an object's gravitational attraction is not solely dependent on its velocity relative to another body, such as Earth. Overall, GR provides a more comprehensive framework for understanding gravity beyond the limitations of Newtonian physics.
James Nelson
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I asked recently on another thread about relativity and its affect on gravitation. I have been informed that gravity is due to how energy bends spacetime, not the Newtonian idea of mass or even the special "relativistic mass."

However this leaves me wondering why general relativity does not involve velocity in its equations. According to E=(mc^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2), relative velocity does have an impact on the total energy of an object. If so, why is it that an object traveling relative to Earth doesn't produce a larger gravitational attraction to Earth than an object of equal rest mass that is stationary?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
James Nelson said:
However this leaves me wondering why general relativity does not involve velocity in its equations.

It does. In GR the source of gravity is the stress-energy-tensor which depends on velocity.
 
  • Like
Likes James Nelson
James Nelson said:
I have been informed that gravity is due to how energy bends spacetime, not the Newtonian idea of mass or even the special "relativistic mass."
It is the stress energy tensor which includes the density of energy, momentum, and stress.
 
  • Like
Likes James Nelson
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top