On Sunday, December 17, 2017 at 12:21:27 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > > > On 12/16/2017 2:59 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > There's a problem applying SR in this situation because neither the ground > or orbiting clock is an inertial frame.AG > > > An orbiting clock is in an inertial frame. An inertial frame is just one > in which no forces are acting (and gravity is not a force) so that it moves > with constant momentum along a geodesic. Although it's convenient for > engineering calculations, from a fundamental veiwpoint there is no separate > special relativity and general relativity and no separate clock > corrections. General relativity is just special relativity in curved > spacetime. So clocks measure the 4-space interval along their path - > whether that path is geodesic (i.e. inertial) or accelerated. >
*Interesting way to look at it. So free falling in a gravity field is an extension of SR. But the thing I find puzzling is that in GR the curvature of space-time is caused by the presence of mass, yet I can draw the path of an accelerated body as necessarily a curve in a space-time diagram. I am having trouble resolving these different sources of curvature. AG* > > Brent > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
