Why does the stone stop before reaching the surface at the other end?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bjarne
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativistic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of a stone dropped into a hypothetical hole through the Earth, examining its motion under both classical and relativistic mechanics. It concludes that regardless of relativistic effects, the stone will convert all potential energy into kinetic energy during its descent, allowing it to return to the original height. The argument against the stone stopping before reaching the surface is supported by the principle that energy conservation applies in both classical and relativistic contexts. The discussion also emphasizes the symmetry of spacetime curvature, which ensures the stone arrives at the opposite height.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics principles, particularly energy conservation
  • Familiarity with relativistic mechanics and its implications on motion
  • Basic knowledge of spacetime curvature and geodesics
  • Ability to interpret visualizations of gravitational effects in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the principles of energy conservation in classical mechanics
  • Study the effects of relativistic mechanics on objects in motion
  • Investigate spacetime curvature and its implications in general relativity
  • Examine simulations of gravitational interactions, such as those found at http://www.adamtoons.de/physics/gravitation.swf
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and enthusiasts interested in the interplay between classical and relativistic mechanics, as well as those exploring gravitational phenomena and energy conservation principles.

Bjarne
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
Imaging a hole the whole way through the Earth, and we will drop a stone into the hole. Imaging there were no resistances at all.

Now the stone would reach the opposite at the Earth and speed here would be exactly zero at the surface at the other end..

Now we will repeat the experiment but this time “Relativistic Resistances” would still count.

It requires more and more energy to get a diminishing increase in speed. – This means that when the stone would reach the center it would not have achieved that speed it is necessary to escape to the surface at the opposite end.

So the stone would now stop before reaching the surface at the other end. (?)
Is that false or correct?

If it is false, - why ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bjarne said:
Imaging a hole the whole way through the Earth, and we will drop a stone into the hole. Imaging there were no resistances at all.

Now the stone would reach the opposite at the Earth and speed here would be exactly zero at the surface at the other end..

Now we will repeat the experiment but this time “Relativistic Resistances” would still count.

It requires more and more energy to get a diminishing increase in speed. – This means that when the stone would reach the center it would not have achieved that speed it is necessary to escape to the surface at the opposite end.

So the stone would now stop before reaching the surface at the other end. (?)
Is that false or correct?

If it is false, - why ?

The red part. It seems you are trying to use relativistic mechanics for the descent but then argue classically about the ascent based on speed. You assume that the "speed necessary to escape to the surface" would be the same in classic or relativistic mechanics.

No matter if classic or relativistic mechanics: The stone converted all potential energy from surface to center into kinetical energy, so it can convert it back to get to the same height. But the speed it has with maximal kinetical energy might be different.

You can also treat the problem geometrically. Since the space time curvature is symmetric, the stone will arrive at the same opposite height. The space time curvature for this case is visualized here:

http://www.adamtoons.de/physics/gravitation.swf

Set initial position to -1 or 1 and initial velocity to 0 for a drop from the surface. As you see the object swings between the surfaces, simply by following a geodesic path in curved space time.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 130 ·
5
Replies
130
Views
17K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
12K