Please, don't try to talk about something you clearly have no idea about...
And don't try to tell me what GTR is. I didn't say gravity was considered a force or not. Some physicist do. That's why they modeled the hypothetical "graviton".
So I''l point out your mistakes...
Quote:
Originally Posted by aakksshhaayy
In our modern time General relativity predicts gravity much better than Newton's law of gravity especially close to very large masses such as black holes or giant stars.(...)So in summary, Newton's law of gravity is not really a law of the universe as it does not work in all situations and we have better ways of predicting the effects of gravity.
|
Ok where do I start... Umm.... (After several hours...) Newton's law of gravitation does work with black holes and big ass stars. It's just expressed differently and in termsof Energy. Basically link E=mc^2 (relativity) and newton's law of gravitation you get....
GM/r= c2
Newton's law hold only at macroscopic level and not at the very small or very fast. (You didn't need to tell me that)
However, they are still laws. They were meant for when a mass was constant. Near the speed of light, acceleration is very small since at the subatomic level, there is duality.
And objects
do not follow a straight line but a world line, since its not a Cartesian system anymore but a "curved" coordinate system.
Personally, I don't understand General Theory of Relativity. I am only at the "intro". It's something that they do in grad level and takes much more effort than to read wikipedia.
And WTF do you mean by no acceleration and acceleration in a different frame of reference. I thought that in GTR, all frame of references were treated equal.
And Gravity is not curvature of space-time and I know its not really a force. Its a fact but GRT is a theory that explains gravity even if that theory has been proven... There is still acceleration because there is still a change in velocity.