Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature, but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me. Is this simply a model that
better fitted the experimental results? I have read somewhere that
Newton wondered about the agent that caused gravitational pull between
the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery thru the GR...Does
Einstein's theory logically explain why the space time gets curved in
the presence of matter?

"Ravindra" wrote in message
ups.com...
Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician
and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature, but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me. Is this simply a model that
better fitted the experimental results? I have read somewhere that
Newton wondered about the agent that caused gravitational pull between
the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery thru the GR...Does
Einstein's theory logically explain why the space time gets curved in
the presence of matter?

It doesn't really explain the "mechanism" if one exists, but it does
explain it if you believe a certain geometry is the correct one. IOW, I
think most physicists just believe the geometry that GR describes is the
correct one without looking for any "causes" for the geometry if they
might exist. Just like you are used to Euclidean geometry of length,
width, height and pi doesn't mean nature actually is like that on
different scales. And GR just tells us how that geometry is altered by
the presence of mass. But IMHO, there might be a "mechanism" that
better explains why the geometry is the way it is and why mass changes
it.

FrediFizzx

http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...uum_charge.pdf
or postscript
http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...cuum_charge.ps

http://www.vacuum-physics.com

One way to look at it is that it's isomorphic to a mathematical axiom -
it just is, and like any axiom it needs no explanation and all we can
do is observe and ctalog its effects through an analog of the Turing
test. Or maybe not. What's the excluded middle???????

What's the excluded middle???????

It's excluded, silly. :P

Ravindra a écrit :
Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature,

Maybe you shouldn't. In GR, inertial motion is causal while
acceleration is relative effect. What causes sp-curvature is
the "presence" of mass, irrespective of motion, which is always
"inertial".

but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me.

It is a postulate of the theory. In other words, he metaphorically
said to himself "If we suppose that the presence of mass bends
4-D space-time, let's see what this leads to".

Is this simply a model that better fitted the experimental results?
I have read somewhere that Newton wondered about the agent that caused
gravitational pull between the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery
thru the GR...Does Einstein's theory logically explain why the space
time gets curved in the presence of matter?

He did not really resolve it. He proposed an alternate model that
was marginally more precise, by replacing Newtonian "gravitational
force" by "space-time curvature" which as an added benefit
incorporated a means to better account for observed relativistic
mass increase with velocity.

André Michaud

"Ravindra" wrote in message ups.com...
Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature, but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me. Is this simply a model that
better fitted the experimental results?

Yes, as are all other theories of physics.

I have read somewhere that
Newton wondered about the agent that caused gravitational pull between
the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery thru the GR...Does
Einstein's theory logically explain why the space time gets curved in
the presence of matter?

Physics describes nature. We cannot demand that it 'works' in
a particular way.

Martin Hogbin

Ravindra wrote:
Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature, but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me. Is this simply a model that
better fitted the experimental results? I have read somewhere that
Newton wondered about the agent that caused gravitational pull between
the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery thru the GR...Does
Einstein's theory logically explain why the space time gets curved in
the presence of matter?


No, it explains -how- the space-time gets curved in the presence of
matter.

Your question may not have a satisfactory answer until there is an
explanation of massive particles - how exactly they exist (e.g. mass
ratios, lifetimes, etc.) - in a subquantum mechanics.

One way to view the problem is that mass IS the curvature of
space-time.. similarly to the definition of electric charge as a
divergence of electric field.

However that only shifts the question a bit..

A handwaving answer is that the dynamic motions in what we call massive
particles disturb the space-time (medium) in a somewhat (very somewhat)
similar manner to a propeller in a pool of water. This disturbance
propogates outward and produces anisotropy in the space-time described
by the field equations.

Good luck -

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature,

Maybe you shouldn't. In GR, inertial motion is causal while
acceleration is relative effect. What causes sp-curvature is
the "presence" of mass, irrespective of motion, which is always
"inertial".

In the book "The elegant Universe" it was clearly explained as to how a
high speed moving tornado would show variations of the fraction
"circumference / diameter" ( the value of Pi) changes when measured
from inside the moving tornado and from outside of it...This kind of
variations are possible only when the circle is drawn on a curved shape
and hence the logical deduction of this story is that space-time is
curved....


srp wrote:
Ravindra a écrit :
Would be very helpful if someone can give me a correct explanation.
Forgive me if my question is stupid because I am not an academician and
am just interested in reading physics books for curiosity and fun.

I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature,

Maybe you shouldn't. In GR, inertial motion is causal while
acceleration is relative effect. What causes sp-curvature is
the "presence" of mass, irrespective of motion, which is always
"inertial".

but how the mere presence of a stationary mass bend the
space time curvature is a mystery to me.

It is a postulate of the theory. In other words, he metaphorically
said to himself "If we suppose that the presence of mass bends
4-D space-time, let's see what this leads to".

Is this simply a model that better fitted the experimental results?
I have read somewhere that Newton wondered about the agent that caused
gravitational pull between the masses and Einstein resolved this mystery
thru the GR...Does Einstein's theory logically explain why the space
time gets curved in the presence of matter?

He did not really resolve it. He proposed an alternate model that
was marginally more precise, by replacing Newtonian "gravitational
force" by "space-time curvature" which as an added benefit
incorporated a means to better account for observed relativistic
mass increase with velocity.

André Michaud

Ravindra a écrit :
I can visualize how an accelarating body can cause space time
curvature,

Maybe you shouldn't. In GR, inertial motion is causal while
acceleration is relative effect. What causes sp-curvature is
the "presence" of mass, irrespective of motion, which is always
"inertial".


In the book "The elegant Universe" it was clearly explained as to how a
high speed moving tornado would show variations of the fraction
"circumference / diameter" ( the value of Pi) changes when measured
from inside the moving tornado and from outside of it...This kind of
variations are possible only when the circle is drawn on a curved shape
and hence the logical deduction of this story is that space-time is
curved....

I think prudence should be exercized about the reality of any conclusion
drawn from such hypothetical (meaning not physically verified, nor
verifiable in the present case) mathematical or logical explanations,
however clear it may seem.

The Elegant Universe, although an interesting read, is hardly a
recognized formal reference.

Mathematics is a language. We can cause it to "prove" any conclusion
logically stemming from whatever premises are chosen, whether these
premises have been verified (or are even verifiable) or not. The
same for logical deductions.

André Michaud

If we assume that " handwaving answer is that the dynamic motions in
what we call massive
particles disturb the space-time (medium) in a somewhat (very somewhat)

similar manner to a propeller in a pool of water. This disturbance
propogates outward and produces anisotropy in the space-time described
by the field equations" is true, then as the mass gets denser and
denser towards a black hole, the dynamic motions inside the mass should
get lesser and lesser and hence the disturbance in the space time
should be less which means lesser gravity that is contradicting?