On 19 February 2014 13:30, Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au> wrote:
> > Acceleration of a point particle doesn't cause light crossing the > > particle to bend (because it's a point) but accel of a larger object > > does because light takes time to cross the object. > > I'm sure the particle size is not relevant. A point-like concentration > of mass-energy will still curve spacetime with an approximate 1/r^2. > We aren't talking about the curvature caused by the mass/energy. That's assumed to exist. We're talking about curvature caused by acceleration, or more likely (I think) not caused by it. > > > But surely this doesn't mean space-time is really curved, or does it? > > Or is space-time curvature relative to an observer (surely not) ??? > > Spacetime curvature is independent of the observer - in the sense that > it is a rank 2 tensor, although its components will vary according to > the observer's reference frame (just like your x,y coordinates change > whenever I move around my house). > > I'm unsure whether my comment about kinetic energy contributing to > curvature is correct though. In the particle's instantaneous inertial > reference frame, the kinetic energy is always zero. Maybe Brent or > someone else could comment. > > Isn't this just the mass increased with velocity measured by an observer moving at a different speed? The question is, does acceleration curve space? It causes effects that are the same as gravity, but I would imagine it doesn't actually curve space. Or does it? -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
