Live data from Hacker News

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

timhutton.github.io

221–230 of 451 posts

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

#221
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Or what is our time size? That's just another way of describing the total time you exist.

Your size in X, Y, Z isn't equal to the total distance you've traveled, so why would your size in t be the total time you've traveled?

[deleted]

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

#222
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a parabola in a uniform gravity field In relativity, there is no such thing as a "uniform gravity field", if by that you mean a field where the "acceleration due to gravity" is the same everywhere. The closest you can come is the "gravity field" inside a rocket accelerating in a straight line in empty space, where the acceleration felt by the crew is constant. That kind of "gravity field" has an "acceleration…

Why would acceleration not be constant? (Assuming the ship isn't moving from the center of the earth outward or something like that.

> Why would acceleration not be constant?

Look up the Bell Spaceship Paradox. In relativity, two spatially separated objects (or two ends of a spatially extended single object) that have the same proper acceleration in the same direction do not stay at rest relative to each other; they move apart, as seen in each of their own frames. This is different from the behavior predicted by Newtonian mechanics. In order to have the two objects (or two ends of a single extended object) remain at rest relative to each other, the one in front has to have a smaller proper acceleration than the one in back. (Rindler coordinates are often used to describe this case.)

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

#223
post #141

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…

On human scales, the time dimension is much "bigger" than the space dimensions... This is really interesting, and it made me wonder how to convert between space and time. I mean, one meter up is equivalent in magnitude to one meter forward, is equivalent to one meter to the right. Is _c_ the conversion between space and time? In other words, is 300 million meters equivalent in magnitude to one second of time?

Or a meter is equivalent to the time that light needs to travel 1 meter.

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

#224
If gravity is not a force, how is spaghettification a thing? If you are stationary when you're weightless, how can different stationary parts of your stationary body move at the different speeds required for spaghettification to take place.

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

#226

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…

Off topic, but in reality, the trajectory of a ball thrown on Earth is not a parabola, but an ellipse [1]: > under the laws of gravity, a parabola is an impossible shape for an object that's gravitationally bound to the Earth. The math simply doesn't work out. If we could design a precise enough experiment, we'd measure that projectiles on Earth make tiny deviations from the predicted parabolic path we all derived in…

Ellipse, parabola, hyperbola and circles are all the same thing (called a comic). The only difference is if it includes or goes through the point at infinity. The relevant branch of mathematics is called projective geometry.

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

#228

Don't we always consider gravity as "acceleration"? In f = m * a, for objects falling from sky, it will be f = m * g where g is gravity, m is mass & f is force Sorry, I think I am missing the point of the article.

g is not gravity, it’s a constant that quantifies the force that gravity impresses on a mass in Newtonian mechanics

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

#229

Always seemed pretty wild to me that for the tiny moment of time photons from my computer screen travel from the LEDs to my eyes, they're being dragged toward the floor at the same 9.8m/s^2 as everything else.

Aren't they being dragged by the Sun, Jupiter, Milky Way Black Hole, Alpha Centauris Black Hole, Sirius, etc also just at an exceptionally small rate?

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

#230
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think this is correct. I think the shell theorem says that the gravitational forces cancel if you are on the inside of a hollow sphere and all mass is on the surface. A perfect sphere of uniform density would not meet the shell theorem assumptions.

> I think the shell theorem says that the gravitational forces cancel if you are on the inside of a hollow sphere and all mass is on the surface. No, it's stronger than that. It says that any spherically symmetric distribution of matter outside a certain radius exerts no "gravitational force" on anything inside that radius, whether there is matter inside that radius or not.

What if my distance to one point on the shell was zero? Would I not feel infinite acceleration towards the massive point on the shell that I was infinitely close to?
Post reply on HN