Leaking, I guess you are implying the equivalence principle is not meant to apply to dropped objects?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:19 AM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > Leaking, this does not apply to the elevator example though. > > And the equivalence principle states that G-force and Gravity aren't > similar but are the same thing. > > So if the non-accelerating clock in the elevator can't be reasoned to be > time dilated according to GR since it occupies an inertial reference frame, > but in in the gravity example... > > Then the equivalence principle so the equivalence-ish principle if it > predicts different things for a thrown or dropped clock. > If you can tell the difference easily, it isn't equivalent! > > Personally I would view that a person standing on earth is accelerating > relative to space but one going with the distortion of space (falling) > isn't as far as space is concerned. > > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:00 AM, leaking pen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> gravity is an acceleration vector, it IS accelerating in relation to >> itself, not just in relation to you. In addition, it's an accelerating >> acceleration vector. >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 1:57 PM, John Berry <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> If you are in an accelerating space elevator, and you throw a clock >>> upwards and then it falls down, the clock looks to be accelerating, but it >>> is in a constant inertial frame not accelerating and so your time should >>> slow due to acceleration according to the equivalence principle of General >>> Relativity (Gravity=time dilation & Gravity=inertia force) but you can't >>> observe other clocks that are in space around you not accelerating to be >>> effected by this form of time dilation. >>> >>> So if it is equivalent then you should be able to see that if you let a >>> clock be effected by gravity (fall) it should also tick faster than your >>> time rate. >>> >>> So a clock thrown into a black hole, at least as far as General >>> Relativity is concerned should be seen to tick at a normal to an observer >>> far away from the black hole! >>> At least until it stops falling. >>> >>> This is not AFAIK a recognized conclusion of General Relativity. >>> >>> >>> John >>> >> >> >
