My problem with the relativity representation on gravity.

In summary: The pushing is coming from the hand, and thus the coulomb force. No gravity used to describe gravity (and no body need be attached to the hand). Its an metaphor, you are "supposed" to focus on the parts it purports to explain, not the other stuff...Better to drop it completely and read MTW's analogy of the rubber sheet. And stop using the bowling ball analogy altogether!In summary, the author thinks that the standard gravity explanations are a poor representation because there is no reason that the moon would slide down this inclination other than a separate source of gravity pulling it downward. He thinks that there is a better way to imagine how warped space is able to pull other objects inward
  • #71
Passionflower said:
Certainly things can be at rest wrt to other things in curved spacetime except of course when a spacetime is non-stationary. I also see no issues with considering things at rest wrt certain coordinate values, for instance a Schwarzschild radius or a shell with a given r-value.
We are in agreement then; I'm not sure anymore what this little quibble was about lol. What exactly is the issue in conclusion?
 

Similar threads

B Gravity on Earth: Explaining Trampoline Warping & Tides
Replies
3
Views
1K
I How can General Relativity explain the Moon drifting apart from Earth
Replies
6
Views
2K
[Gravity in general relativity] I dont understand this help
Replies
2
Views
2K
B Gravity facts, or close to fact
Replies
5
Views
1K
What is the Fine-Structure Constant and its Relation to Gravity?
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
B Can an Object Exceed the Speed of Light?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Gravity and General Relativity: The Curvature of Space-Time
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Gravitational Lensing: Gravity's Effect on Light
Replies
11
Views
2K
Four amateur questions about gravity and general relativity
Replies
22
Views
4K
Gravity & Magnetism: How Mass Interacts with Space-Time?
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top