Return to Question

There is something about Einstein Equivalence Principle that I don't quite get. This is my reasoning:

1. Equivalence principle $\rightarrow$ locally, acceleration is equivalent to a gravitational field

2. Forces ( which each observer, inertial or not inertial, agree about) causes particles to have a proper acceleration (they don't follow geodesics)

3. These particles which have a proper acceleration, from their point of view, feel a gravitational field (point one).

Now... is this gravitational field real or fictitious?

If it is real $\rightarrow$ it must depend on mass distribution around the object. So the force which caused the acceleration must be linked to the mass distribution somehow (since these two actions balance themselves so that the object is in equilibrium, from his point of view).

If it is fictitious $\rightarrow$ then it has nothing to do with "real" gravity, which depends on mass and is manifested as the curvature of spacetime. In this case, the Equivalence Principle seems to me just a coincindence which has nothing in common with the geometrized view of curved spacetime.

If my assumptions are correct... which of the two options is true?

There is something about Einstein Equivalence Principle that I don't quite get. This is my reasoning:

1. Equivalence principle $\rightarrow$ locally, acceleration is equivalent to a gravitational field

2. Forces (which each observer, inertial or not inertial, agree about) causes particles to have a proper acceleration (they don't follow geodesics)

3. These particles which have a proper acceleration, from their point of view, feel a gravitational field (point one).

Now... is this gravitational field real or fictitious?

If it is real $\rightarrow$ it must depend on mass distribution around the object. So the force which caused the acceleration must be linked to the mass distribution somehow (since these two actions balance themselves so that the object is in equilibrium, from his point of view).

If it is fictitious $\rightarrow$ then it has nothing to do with “real” gravity, which depends on mass and is manifested as the curvature of spacetime. In this case, the Equivalence Principle seems to me just a coincidence which has nothing in common with the geometrized view of curved spacetime.

If my assumptions are correct... which of the two options is true?

There is something about Einstein Equivalence Principle that I don't quite get. This is my reasoning:

1. Equivalence principle --> locally, acceleration is equivalent to a gravitational field

2. Forces ( which each observer, inertial or not inertial, agree about) causes particles to have a proper acceleration (they don't follow geodesics)

3. These particles which have a proper acceleration, from their point of view, feel a gravitational field (point one).

Now... is this gravitational field real or fictitious?

If it is real --> it must depend on mass distribution around the object. So the force which caused the acceleration must be linked to the mass distribution somehow (since these two actions balance themselves so that the object is in equilibrium, from his point of view).

If it is fictitious --> then it has nothing to do with "real" gravity, which depends on mass and is manifested as the curvature of spacetime. In this case, the Equivalence Principle seems to me just a coincindence which has nothing in common with the geometrized view of curved spacetime.

If my assumptions are correct... which of the two options is true?

There is something about Einstein Equivalence Principle that I don't quite get. This is my reasoning:

1. Equivalence principle $\rightarrow$ locally, acceleration is equivalent to a gravitational field

2. Forces ( which each observer, inertial or not inertial, agree about) causes particles to have a proper acceleration (they don't follow geodesics)

3. These particles which have a proper acceleration, from their point of view, feel a gravitational field (point one).

Now... is this gravitational field real or fictitious?

If it is real $\rightarrow$ it must depend on mass distribution around the object. So the force which caused the acceleration must be linked to the mass distribution somehow (since these two actions balance themselves so that the object is in equilibrium, from his point of view).

If it is fictitious $\rightarrow$ then it has nothing to do with "real" gravity, which depends on mass and is manifested as the curvature of spacetime. In this case, the Equivalence Principle seems to me just a coincindence which has nothing in common with the geometrized view of curved spacetime.

If my assumptions are correct... which of the two options is true?