0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
So what does the statement, relativistic objects fall faster than stationary ones mean?
Einstein showed that light was bent by gravity twice as much as it was predicted to bend with classical mechanics.
Last time I asked a similar question it went unanswered, I figured nobody knew the answer, so im guessing this one will go unanswered as well, but its worth a shot.Relativistic objects fall faster, in the presence of gravity, than "stationary ones". And at the speed of light an object falls twice as fast.I have a few questions about that statement I just said. Relative to what does a "moving" object fall faster than a "stationary" one?Also consider this experiment, what if you had two parallel mirrors, placed in a free falling elevator on the surface of the earth. You then fire a photon so it would bounce back and forth from mirror to mirror. would you witness the light being affected by gravity more than you, or would the beam stay stationary relative to you(or at least bouncing in the same place over and over relative to you)?Allright, im going to think out loud, somebody correct me if I make a mistake.I figure that due to the equivalence principle, the person and the photon would fall at the same rate. Being that my experiment is pretty much local, all observers would have to agree that the person in the elevator and the photon would fall at the same rate as well.So somehow, bouncing light back and forth causes the light to fall, at least in the long run, at the rate newton would of expected. So what does the statement, relativistic objects fall faster than stationary ones mean, and how does acceleration (ie. bouncing light back and forth) affect that statement?
Ball bouncing up and down has the largest speed closer to the ground.Light bouncing up and down has the slowest speed closer to the ground.
I can't understand most of what you're trying to say here, but that is wrong. Light moves at a constant speed. It isn't slower closer to the ground.
Quote from: JP on 17/11/2010 10:33:55I can't understand most of what you're trying to say here, but that is wrong. Light moves at a constant speed. It isn't slower closer to the ground.Well that's offending.  Leave the "trying" out.Light spends some extra time traveling if there is a gravity well along the way. Newton would say light saves some travel time if there is gravity well along the way.