Why does only one object feel accelerated?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ascenxion
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the interpretation of why only one object feels accelerated in the context of general relativity. It highlights that Einstein's theory posits that forces experienced by objects under constant proper acceleration are similar to those in a gravitational field, which was crucial for developing general relativity. The conversation references the twin paradox to illustrate the implications of acceleration and relative motion on aging. It clarifies that while special relativity only considers inertial frames as equivalent, general relativity expands this to include free-falling frames in gravitational fields as inertial. Ultimately, general relativity redefines the relationship between inertial and accelerated frames in the presence of gravity.
Ascenxion
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
In terms of general relativity, what does this question mean?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ascenxion said:
In terms of general relativity, what does this question mean?

Thanks.

Does it mean "why does an object feel a force acting on it"?
 
One object? Which object? :confused:
 
Well, I found this question in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceleration" topic in Wikipedia, and I was confused about its meaning.

After completing his theory of special relativity, Albert Einstein realized that forces felt by objects undergoing constant proper acceleration are indistinguishable from those in a gravitational field. This was the basis for his development of general relativity, a relativistic theory of gravity. This is also the basis for the popular twin paradox, which asks why one twin ages less when moving away from his sibling at near light-speed and then returning, since the non-aging twin can say that it is the other twin that was moving. General relativity solved the "why does only one object feel accelerated?" problem which had plagued philosophers and scientists since Newton's time (and caused Newton to endorse absolute space). In special relativity, only inertial frames of reference (non-accelerated frames) can be used and are equivalent; general relativity considers all frames, even accelerated ones, to be equivalent. (The path from these considerations to the full theory of general relativity is traced in the introduction to general relativity.)

Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wikipedia said:
In special relativity, only inertial frames of reference (non-accelerated frames) can be used and are equivalent; general relativity considers all frames, even accelerated ones, to be equivalent.
I don't know what they mean by "equivalent frames of reference", but in GR still only inertial frames have the same physical laws: local experiments give the same results in all of them. The new thing in GR is that free falling frames in a small region of a gravitational field are considered inertial too, so you can use SR there.

So GR is not making accelerated frames equivalent to inertial ones, but it redefines what an inertial vs. accelerated frame is, regarding gravitational fields.
 
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
749
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
658
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
693