Live data from Hacker News

Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

timhutton.github.io

11–20 of 451 posts

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#11

How would periodic “free-fall” motion look in this setup? E.g. a point mass orbiting around a body, or a point mass oscillating back and forth in a 1D gravity well.

In the left-hand image, an orbit would be a horizontal line, because it's a constant distance. So it's a mirror of the time axis, but translated upwards in space. It would be exactly the same axis-mirroring translation in the other images. So, importantly, it would not be a line in the right-hand image.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#12
Somewhere I read that a free fall parabola does not even take into account earth's curvature. Although I cannot remember, what kind of function describes the reference system specific ``path, as a function of time''.

Could this be named more correctly: Gravity is not a force – free-fall hyperbolas are straight lines in spacetime (timhutton.github.io) ?

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#13
post #6

True gravitational force is something that can’t be transformed away by an arbitrary choice of frame (even an accelerating one). As a brief example, consider two objects in downwards free fall toward the centre of some massive object. Since they head towards the centre, in a free falling frame the two objects actually get closer to each other until they collide as they reach the centre. This is known as the tidal eff…

"If you and a friend started walking straight north, both at the equator but a long distance apart, you would gradually get closer to each other until you collided at the north pole."

I always thought that was a nice way to drop one dimension down to get the intuition. To the metaphorical 2D ant they see two friends attracted to/falling towards each other, but they are going in a straight line on a curved surface and there are no forces at play.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#14
I heard an interesting question at one point: "how come, when you throw a ball up on Earth, the parabola is so strongly curved? Spacetime is nearly flat, so how can a straight line become such a steep parabola?"

I'll answer this question as I understand it, but I only took four lectures of General Relativity before I gave it up in favour of computability and logic, so if there is a more intuitive and/or less wrong answer out there, please correct me.

Intuitive answer: the curve is indeed very gentle, and (e.g.) light will be deflected only very slightly by the curvature; but the ball is moving for a couple of seconds, and that's an eternity. On human scales, the time dimension is much "bigger" than the space dimensions (we're quite big in the time dimension and quite small in the spatial dimensions); the ball moves only a small distance through space but a very large distance through time, amounting to a big distance in spacetime, and so the slight curvature has a bigger effect than you might expect.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#15

I heard an interesting question at one point: "how come, when you throw a ball up on Earth, the parabola is so strongly curved? Spacetime is nearly flat, so how can a straight line become such a steep parabola?" I'll answer this question as I understand it, but I only took four lectures of General Relativity before I gave it up in favour of computability and logic, so if there is a more intuitive and/or less wrong an…

This is in tune with what happens when you change the timescale in a game engine with proper physics.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#16
post #6

True gravitational force is something that can’t be transformed away by an arbitrary choice of frame (even an accelerating one). As a brief example, consider two objects in downwards free fall toward the centre of some massive object. Since they head towards the centre, in a free falling frame the two objects actually get closer to each other until they collide as they reach the centre. This is known as the tidal eff…

It's been some time since I studied these things, but I believe the post was trying to illustrate that the geodesic lines in spacetime created by Earth's gravity field can be visualized as straight lines after a nonlinear change of the coordinates system. [1] To simplify, these are the lines along which particles move when no outside force is exerted on them--again, considering gravity to be a distortion of spacetime and not a force, very much like the well-known metaphor of steel ball on a rubber sheet, which would curve marbles towards the "well" it's created in the sheet. But you're right that once the marbles and the steel ball get to a point where one of the gravitational fields cannot be ignored, this framework becomes less useful.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#17

I heard an interesting question at one point: "how come, when you throw a ball up on Earth, the parabola is so strongly curved? Spacetime is nearly flat, so how can a straight line become such a steep parabola?" I'll answer this question as I understand it, but I only took four lectures of General Relativity before I gave it up in favour of computability and logic, so if there is a more intuitive and/or less wrong an…

>I heard an interesting question at one point: "how come, when you throw a ball up on Earth, the parabola is so strongly curved? Spacetime is nearly flat, so how can a straight line become such a steep parabola?"

Air resistance, wind, and horizonal acceleration. Over long vertical distances, these perturbations in the x-axis cause an arc. Nothing to do with general relativity.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#18

How would periodic “free-fall” motion look in this setup? E.g. a point mass orbiting around a body, or a point mass oscillating back and forth in a 1D gravity well.

This has some visualizations of space time curvature where you can get a sense of the lines particles take in different circumstances: http://www.relativitet.se/Webtheses/lic.pdf

I tried to explain it with words, but I guess the images are worth more than I could write..

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#19

How would periodic “free-fall” motion look in this setup? E.g. a point mass orbiting around a body, or a point mass oscillating back and forth in a 1D gravity well.

In the left-hand image, an orbit would be a horizontal line, because it's a constant distance. So it's a mirror of the time axis, but translated upwards in space. It would be exactly the same axis-mirroring translation in the other images. So, importantly, it would not be a line in the right-hand image.

The concept of a constant distance orbit doesn't make much sense in 1D. A horizontal line in this model wouldn't indicate an orbit, but rather a completely stationary object. It would then make sense for the world line to curved because it must be accelerating in order to resist the attraction of the body it's near.

By definition, the world line of a stable orbit would be a line in curved spacetime.

Re: Gravity is not a force – free-fall parabolas are straight lines in spacetime

#20

I heard an interesting question at one point: "how come, when you throw a ball up on Earth, the parabola is so strongly curved? Spacetime is nearly flat, so how can a straight line become such a steep parabola?" I'll answer this question as I understand it, but I only took four lectures of General Relativity before I gave it up in favour of computability and logic, so if there is a more intuitive and/or less wrong an…

Are we flat in the time dimension? Or what is our time size?
Post reply on HN