Why are gravity forces on going in the context of GR

jp7
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am new to General Relativity, so please excuse my ignorance ahead of time. :)

While attempting to grasp the concept of bending spacetime I was stumped by the concept of continual gravitational forces and how they exist in the concept of GR. To clarify I understand the following as reasonable to say, that given the bending of spacetime the moon orbits about the Earth not because it is actually rotating about, but rather because the definition of the straight line path that the moon was taking has been redefined due to a bending of spacetime by the earth. However where I am having trouble is the concept of a book on a table. Gravity is not pushing on the book downward but rather the table is pushing up on the book due to the books original path of travel being redefined to point to the center of the Earth (the table is just in the way). Sounds good, however why is the force continual. Meaning why does the book not decelerate by the table and then float off, to illustrate, if I threw the book at the wall in a straight line it would hit the wall and then bounce, not stick to it and stay there with a force based on its weight. To follow that same point if there is no motion of either body in the depths of space would the two attract? Given Newton the answer is yes, however with neither body moving regardless of straight line definitions it would seem (by my limited understanding) that with GR the answer would be no. Again sorry for the lame question, however I am really stumped by this.

By the way I am currently reading Spacetime and Geometry (Carroll) and using Gravity (Hartle) as a reference. If you have recommendations for any GR books I would be interested.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At each point in time (and the position of the book, and zero velocity in the Earth frame), the corresponding geodesic leads to the center of earth. The force of the table constantly pushes the book "away" from those geodesics "into" other ones.

To follow that same point if there is no motion of either body in the depths of space would the two attract?
Yes.

GR is not a curved space, it is a curved spacetime, and the time-like components can give you geodesics like this.
 
As mfb explained, it's curved space-time that's relevant in GR. An object at rest takes a straight path through space-time, since they must move forward through time. Other inertial frames of reference differ in the angle of this line, but they always travel in straight lines through space-time. However, accelerating observers take curved trajectories through 4 dimensional space-time. Since massive bodies warp space-time, objects at rest try to follow geodesics, but since space-time is curved, this amounts to taking a curved trajectory. So, an object at rest in a gravitational field accelerates towards the center of mass.
 
jp7 said:
I am new to General Relativity, so please excuse my ignorance ahead of time. :)

While attempting to grasp the concept of bending spacetime I was stumped by the concept of continual gravitational forces and how they exist in the concept of GR. To clarify I understand the following as reasonable to say, that given the bending of spacetime the moon orbits about the Earth not because it is actually rotating about, but rather because the definition of the straight line path that the moon was taking has been redefined due to a bending of spacetime by the earth. However where I am having trouble is the concept of a book on a table. Gravity is not pushing on the book downward but rather the table is pushing up on the book due to the books original path of travel being redefined to point to the center of the Earth (the table is just in the way). Sounds good, however why is the force continual. Meaning why does the book not decelerate by the table and then float off, to illustrate, if I threw the book at the wall in a straight line it would hit the wall and then bounce, not stick to it and stay there with a force based on its weight. To follow that same point if there is no motion of either body in the depths of space would the two attract? Given Newton the answer is yes, however with neither body moving regardless of straight line definitions it would seem (by my limited understanding) that with GR the answer would be no. Again sorry for the lame question, however I am really stumped by this.

By the way I am currently reading Spacetime and Geometry (Carroll) and using Gravity (Hartle) as a reference. If you have recommendations for any GR books I would be interested.

Thanks
With the book sitting on the table, it is hard to imagine how it can be accelerating upward. Why doesn't one see it rising upward? The situation is really similar to what you have with centrifugal acceleration. Have you ever gone on the Roundup ride at an amusement park, where the platform is rotating around an axis, and where they then drop the bottom out, and you are pinned against the rim. There is a force acting on you by the rim, but you don't move radially inward toward the center of rotation. In the GR situation, the time direction and the radial direction are participating in the rotation.

Chet
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...

Similar threads

Back
Top