Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,853 answers , 20,624 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Rotating Particle - Violation of Einstein Equivalence Principle

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
143 views

How does adding rotation to a freely falling particle violate the Einstein equivalence principle?

I realize there is a similar post here:

An example of a theory that respects the Weak Equivalence Principle but violates the Einstein Equivalence Principle

but I failed to understand the response after reading it a number of times.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-08 14:03 (UTC), posted by SE-user Optimus Prime
asked Nov 4, 2016 in Theoretical Physics by Optimus Prime (80 points) [ no revision ]
Just to clear, because I have a related question, not an answer, is this the extract that is the problem for you We could imagine a theory of gravity in which freely falling particles begin to rotate as they moved through a gravitational field. Then they could fall along the same paths as they would in an accelerated frame (thereby satisfying the WEP), but you could nevertheless detect the existence of the gravitational field (in violation of the EEP). Such theories seem contrived, but there is no law of nature that forbids them.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-08 14:03 (UTC), posted by SE-user CountTo10
Yes, it's from Carroll.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-08 14:03 (UTC), posted by SE-user Optimus Prime
Wouldn't the gravitational field have to have torsion for this to happen, if it was GR?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-08 14:03 (UTC), posted by SE-user Bob Bee
Could you explain more please @Bob?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-08 14:03 (UTC), posted by SE-user Optimus Prime

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar\varnothing$sicsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...