Tap for spoiler

The bowling ball isn’t falling to the earth faster. The higher perceived acceleration is due to the earth falling toward the bowling ball.

    • Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yeah it would fair point, I’ll be honest I haven’t touched Newtonian gravity in a long time now so I’d forgotten that was a thing. You’d still need to do a finite element calculation for the feather though.

      There’s a similar phenomenon in general relativity, but it doesn’t apply when you’ve got multiple sources because it’s non-linear.

      • BB84@mander.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        25 minutes ago

        So if I have a spherically symmetric object in GR I can write the Schwarzschild metric that does not depend on the radial mass distribution. But once I add a second spherically symmetric object, the metric now depends on the mass distribution of both objects?

        Your point about linearity is that if GR was linear, I could’ve instead add two Schwarzschild metrics together to get a new metric that depends only on each object’s position and total mass?

        Anyway, assuming we are in a situation with only one source, will the shell theorem still work in GR? Say I put a infinitely light spherical shell close to a black hole. Would it follow the same trajectory as a point particle?