Quote:
Originally Posted by sjastro
You change the subject matter when it's convenient for you.
This has nothing to do with the context of the equivalence principle.
"All fictitious forces are proportional to the mass of the object upon which they act, which is also true for gravity. [17] This led Albert Einstein to wonder whether gravity was a fictitious force as well. He noted that a freefalling observer in a closed box would not be able to detect the force of gravity; hence, freefalling reference frames are equivalent to an inertial reference frame (the equivalence principle). Following up on this insight, Einstein was able to formulate a theory with gravity as a fictitious force; attributing the apparent acceleration of gravity to the curvature of spacetime. This idea underlies Einstein's theory of general relativity."
And what do you think is the property of mass that causes this, it is density. It's why low mass high density Neutron stars cause space time to distort.
You haven't explained anything. There is no relationship between frequency and geometry.
Red shift (or time dilation due to gravity) is independant of space time geometry. It can occur in flat space or curved space and is dependant on the gravitational potential differences between earth and satellite clocks.
As I have already mentioned gravitational redshift has been mathematically formulated using flat space (and the equivalence principle).
I certainly did not state the Earth does not distort space time, but on the basis of observation the effects are not apparent.
And on that note this thread is concluded. |
Rubbish: I have stayed on the subject.
If you think gravity is fictitious: go jump off a tall building.
Density is not a property of mass, but mass is a property of density.
Where do you get the idea that a neutron star has low mass: according to NASA a neutron star has the
mass of about 1.4 times that of our Sun.
Despite what you have asserted, the Earth does change the geometry of space-time. Certainly not to the extent of a neutron star, nor to the extent that our sun does, but nevertheless by a measurable and measured amount as I have already illustrated.
Get off: who are you to say the thread is concluded