Share
Share with:
Link:
Copy link
P.S. (to above post : November 20) An accelerated motion of the two elevator cabins is the same. So, inertial force is the same. On the other hand, strength of gravity acting on the two is different. Now, imagine a certain moment. The difference of gravity acting on the two is the same to the difference when the two were hung by a crane. In both, gravity is acting on every point (with a certain value).
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
An elevator is in free fall. Gravity and inertial force acting on each point of the cabin is nearly the same, but both take certain exact value (not 0 : calculable). Vanishing of gravity will be only appearance. In physics, “0 vs 0“ and “a vs b (nearly a)” will not be the same.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
Allow me to rewrite previous posts (Nov 18, Nov 19).
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
In outer space, there is an elevator cabin. A ray of Sirius (a star of the first magnitude) is passing through a small hole on the left wall and on the right wall, a light spot is projected. When the cabin is floating in non-gravitational field, the light spot does not move. But in free fall, the light spot moves. When the above cabin is moving in an accelerated motion (upward), the light spot moves. But when it stays on the surface of the moon, the light spot does not move (by g).
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
A passenger car is moving to the right in an accelerated motion (at 1/100 g). In the car, a body is moving to the right in an accelerated motion (at 2/100 g). All can be explained with inertial force. For gravity, there will be no room for acceptance.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
An observer is moving to the left at a uniform speed. Free fall of an elevator cabin begins. The cabin draws a parabola. The second observer is moving downward at a uniform speed in addition to the motion to the left. The second observer will see the same parabola (that of the beginning of free fall). In free fall, gravity acts also. Equivalence principle will be wrong.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
P.S. The second observer sees the parabola at lower position of the beginning.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
If gravity does not exist, there is no gravitational mass, there is only inertial mass. Now, just know what inertia is. Is inertia absolute or relativistic?
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
There is a structure. On it, rails are lied. The structure slants (to the left) at a 10 and a 20 degree angle. At the right end of the rails, there is a sled and by slanting, the sled slides down to the left. The rails are no friction. Forces act on the sliding sled are gravity, normal reaction and inertial force. Each value is concrete and calculable. It will be the same on a 80 degree angle. So, explanation on a 90 degree angle written in books must be replaced with D’Alember’s principle.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.
Two elevator cabins are hung by cranes. One is at a standstill and at the side of it, the other is moving upward in an accelerated motion. Each instrument shows value 1g and 1.2g. Equivalence principle is difficult to accept.
The Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravitation in General Relativity
So far, you've demonstrated nothing and debunked nothing.
You just keep saying the 'accelerated & non-accelerated' frames of reference are not equivalent' over and over without really demonstrating anything.
So let me give you a head start to enlighten you!
When a system of reference undergoes uniform acceleration, distant masses in the front of it must appear to accelerate towards it at the same uniform acceleration. By contrast, distant masses behind this same system of reference must appear to accelerate away from it at the same uniform acceleration.
Since there is no privileged system of reference in general relativity, an observer at rest with respect to this accelerated system is entitled to consider his system at rest and that the distant masses are undergoing the acceleration in question. And hence, he must conclude that the entire "space-time territory in question is under the sway of a gravitational field".
Look more closely at the profile of this equivalent gravitational field. All distant masses in the forward direction are accelerating towards the system of reference at the same uniform rate; while all distant masses in the backward direction are accelerating away from this same system at the same uniform rate. And this means that the source of this gravitational field must be located somewhere beyond the accelerating-away masses.
I hope, now, you're enlightened, and can see very clearly that acceleration and gravitation are indeed equivalent in every respect and exactly as Einstein concludes in his 1916-groundbreaking paper.