Uncommon Sense

December 21, 2024

Making Space-Time Work

It is claimed that Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity replaced Newton’s gravitational theory. Newton’s theory described the force of gravity, while Einstein said “Force, what force, space-time is distorted by embedded masses and so moving objects instead of moving in straight lines, move along the curved lines of space-time.

A common example used to distinguish these two ideas is an orbiting satellite, like the moon or the ISS. In Newtonian physics, the satellite moves in a straight line unless acted upon by a force. The force involved was gravity, which was a pull on the satellite causing its path to change. In effect the satellite is pulled “down” toward the Earth but it keeps missing it because of its “sideways” movement.

In Einstein’s physics, there is no force, the satellite is travelling along a “straight” line of curved space-time, giving the appearance of a force acting when there is really no force. (Think of a NASCAR race on a steeply banked track. When the cars enter the banked parts of the track, they don’t have to turn their steering wheels much or at all because the slant of the track imparts the turn needed.)

Okay, here is my problem with Einstein’s conception of “gravity.” Starting with a board at a slant (see illustration below). We all know if the ball is in such a position, if it is free to move, it will roll down the plane. But in the absence of gravity, what happens to the ball? <Jeopardy theme music playing>

In the absence of gravity or any other force the ball doesn’t move. It stays where it is (according to the Law of Inertia, or Newton’s First Law: an object will remain at rest or continue moving in a straight line at a constant speed unless acted upon by an external force.

Okay, now consider a larger experiment. The Earth orbits the Sun because of space-time being curved by the Sun, right? If we had access to a Star Trek like matter transporter and we “beamed” a round ball into a position stationary with regard to the Sun, what would happen to it? According to Einstein, it would not move because there would be no force acting upon it. Available paths, aka distorted space-time surfaces, to that ball may be myriad, but since it is not moving, it would take none of those.

According to Newton, it would move in a straight line directly into the Sun. According to Einstein, it would not move. Now, I ask you: would the ball move?

Postscript In a comment to a comment where I share this thought experiment, the commenter on my comment went on and on about how thee Sun was moving, along with the Milky Way Galaxy, rotating around the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, moving as part of a supercluster, etc. Apparently the phrase “with regard to the Sun” was insufficient, so may I clarify that it was stationary relative to the Sun or that it moved along with the Sun, not just relative to it? Sheesh.

2 Comments »

  1. Herald Newman's avatar

    According to Einstein, it would not move because there would be no force acting upon it.

    I don’t think this is correct. While there wouldn’t be a “force” in the Newtonian sense, the ball would still accelerate and move. Under GR, objects follow the geodesics in the curved space-time. So, the ball would indeed move towards the Sun because of the curvature of space-time created by the Sun’s mass.

    I’m not a physicists, and the last time I took any physics classes was almost 30 years ago, but I have read a little bit about the subject since then.

    Liked by 3 people

    Comment by Herald Newman — December 21, 2024 @ 11:26 am | Reply

  2. AJOwens's avatar

    Thinking about the ball and the plane, if both the ball and the plane were beamed into a stationary position around the sun, would the ball move with respect to the plane? No, it wouldn’t. They would both fall together toward the sun, but if you were looking only at the ball and plane, and falling along with them (as if in an Einsteinian elevator), the ball would not appear to be moving.

    Note tat this would be the prediction of Newtonian physics also. The question is thus not how things behave in one system or the other, but why they behave as they do. According to Newton, the situation is explained by an invisible force-at-a-distance that acts between the sun, on the one hand, and the ball-and-plane complex on the other, drawing them together. According to Einstein, it is explained by a differential in space and time at the position of the sun, on the one hand, and the ball-and-plane complex on the other, which resolves itself into their unification. At least I think so. Relativity is a curious thing with some curious effects, but the consensus among those who have done the math is that it works.

    Like

    Comment by AJOwens — December 21, 2024 @ 8:05 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started