Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Free fall — where it appears

Motion under gravity alone, in which nothing is felt and every nearby body keeps its relative position to the accuracy the region's size allows. A freely falling frame is the closest thing to an inertial one that a gravitational field permits, and its failure over a distance is exactly the tidal field.

Named by 11 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Velocity and acceleration in uniform circular motion. Velocity drawn tangent to a circular path and acceleration drawn toward its centre, at eight points around the circle. The speed never changes and the acceleration is never zero; the two vectors are perpendicular everywhere.

Turning is an acceleration, and constant speed does not help

An object going round a circle at unchanging speed is accelerating hard, all the time, toward a point it never reaches. The construction that shows this needs two arrows and no calculus.

mechanics · Circular motion Light crossing an accelerating box. A pulse crosses a box 6 m wide while the box accelerates at 9.81 m/s². The crossing takes 2·10⁻⁸ s, in which the far wall gains 1.96·10⁻⁷ m/s, so the pulse lands 1.96·10⁻¹⁵ m below the height it left at — and the path is a parabola. An observer sealed inside cannot tell that from a beam of light bending in a gravitational field, and the equivalence principle says there is nothing to tell. The sag is drawn 5.6·10¹⁴ times its true size.

The floor that cannot be told from gravity

Seal a laboratory, take away the windows, and no experiment inside it can distinguish standing in a gravitational field from accelerating through empty space. That is not a philosophical remark — it forces light to bend, forces clocks to disagree, and has a size at which it stops being true.

astrophysics · Equivalence principle What the distant observer actually receives. The frequency of a signal from a clock falling into a horizon, as received far away, against the receiver's own time. It is a straight line on a logarithmic axis, which means the fading is exponential: the e-folding time fitted to the drawn curve is 2.01 rs/c, which for a 10-solar-mass hole is 198 microseconds. Nothing hovers. The image reddens, the photons arrive at an exponentially falling rate, and within a millisecond there is nothing left to see.

Two clocks that disagree about the fall

A clock falling into a horizon crosses it in a few milliseconds by its own reckoning and never crosses it at all by a distant one. Both accounts are right, and the thing everybody remembers about the second — that the image hangs there for ever — is wrong.

astrophysics · Horizons How large a box may be before gravity shows in it. The largest freely falling laboratory in which nothing can be detected, against how long the experiment runs, for an instrument resolving 10⁻⁹ m. Free fall removes the field and leaves the gradient: two masses released a distance apart converge across the fall and separate along it, by (GM/r³)Lt²/2, so the box that stays undetectably flat shrinks as the square of the time. At one second the limits are 1.30 mm at the Earth's surface, 5.07 mm at the Sun's surface, 8.61 nm at a white dwarf, 1.86·10⁻¹⁷ m at a neutron star, 3.88·10⁻¹⁷ m at a stellar black hole, 388 mm at a giant black hole. Two things are worth reading off it. The equivalence principle is local in time as much as in space, on the same footing and with a worse exponent — patience is more expensive than room. And the tidal parameter GM/r³ falls with mass at a horizon, so a large enough black hole is one an experimenter could fall through with a metre-sized laboratory and a very good interferometer and detect nothing at all: the curve for the giant lies above the Earth's, not below it.

The term free fall cannot remove

Fall freely and gravity disappears. It disappears only to the extent that the falling laboratory is small — what survives is the gradient, which pulls two released masses together across the fall and apart along it. Given an instrument, the size of the box in which nothing is detectable is computable, and that number is the whole content of the word "locally".

astrophysics · Equivalence principle The bigger the hole, the gentler the horizon. The difference in gravitational pull between the two ends of a 1.8 metre body, at the moment it crosses the horizon, against the mass of the hole. Both axes are logarithmic and the line is straight, of slope -2.00: the tidal acceleration at a horizon falls as the square of the mass, because the tide goes as the mass over the cube of the radius and the radius itself is proportional to the mass. At the low end — a hole of a few solar masses — the stretch is 1.9e+7 times Earth's gravity across a person, which pulls them apart long before they arrive. At the high end it is 1.9e-11, which is nothing at all: crossing the horizon of a large enough hole is locally unremarkable, and an observer would notice no boundary being passed. The two meet at 1.0e+4 solar masses, above which the horizon can be crossed intact. That is the sharpest available statement of what a horizon is and is not. It is not a surface, nothing is there, and nothing local marks it — it is the place from which no future path leads out, which is a statement about the whole of the future rather than about anything present.

The horizon that nothing marks

A falling body is torn apart by the difference in gravity between its ends. At the horizon of a black hole that difference goes as the inverse square of the mass, so a large enough hole can be entered intact — and nothing local happens at the crossing to say it has occurred.

astrophysics · Horizons What a scale reads while a chain falls onto it. The reading of a scale, in units of the whole chain's weight, against the length of chain that has already landed, for two ways of putting the same chain down. Lowered gently, the scale reads the weight of what is resting on it and nothing else, so the reading climbs along the diagonal to one and stops. Dropped from rest with its lower end just touching, the scale reads three times that at every instant of the fall: one part is the pile's weight and two parts is the force needed to stop the links that are arriving, which is λv² with v² = 2gx and is therefore exactly twice λgx however far the fall has got. The peak, read off the drawn curve, is 3.00 chain weights. It is reached at the instant the last link lands, and the reading then falls discontinuously to one, because the momentum flux stops all at once. The discontinuity is the part a real experiment does not show — a real chain has links of a finite size and a scale has a response time — and it is the reason a chain dropped into a bucket on a kitchen scale reads high and then settles.

The pile that lands heavier than it weighs

Drop a chain onto a scale and the reading is three times the weight of the part that has landed — not approximately, exactly, all the way through the fall. The extra two parts are the force needed to stop links that are still arriving, and the same arithmetic run backwards says that picking a chain up wastes exactly half the energy it takes to get it moving.

mechanics · Momentum Every detour costs time. 4 routes between the same two events, 10 seconds apart in the frame drawn, each swinging out and back 1 time on the way. The proper time each carries is the integral of the square root of one minus the speed squared, computed by Simpson's rule along each curve: the straight route, 10.0000 s; wandering 1 light-seconds, 9.7485 s; wandering 2 light-seconds, 8.9245 s; wandering 3 light-seconds, 7.0935 s. The straight one carries the most, and every other one carries less — checked, on each drawn route. That is the opposite of what a length behaves like on paper, where the straight line is the shortest, and the whole difference is the minus sign in front of the space term.

The longest way round is the shortest clock

Of all the routes between two events, the one with no acceleration in it carries the most time on its own clock. That is the opposite of the Euclidean statement about straight lines, it comes entirely from one minus sign, and in a gravitational field it is why a thrown ball follows the path it does.

relativity · Time dilation The hourglass that keeps time. Discharge against how much is left above the opening, for grain and for liquid through the same 40 mm hole, each as a fraction of its own rate at a full hopper. The grain rate is a horizontal line: it does not appear in Beverloo's law at all, because the pressure at the outlet does not depend on the head — the walls carry the weight, which is what Janssen's argument establishes, so the grains at the opening are pushed by their immediate neighbours and by nothing else. The liquid falls as the square root of the head and is down to 32 per cent by the time a tenth is left. That is why an hourglass keeps time and a water clock does not, and why the water clocks that worked were built with a float and an overflow to hold the head constant.

The hourglass that keeps time

Grain leaves a hopper at a rate that does not depend on how much is above it, and that goes as the orifice to the five-halves power rather than the one half a liquid gives. Both facts follow from the same thing: the weight is carried by the walls, not by the grains at the opening.

fluids · Granular matter The power at stake, which is none. The power an electron radiates by Larmor's formula, against its acceleration, with 5 cases marked. a charge on a table: 9.8e+0 m/s², 5.49e-52 W; a laboratory centrifuge: 1.0e+6 m/s², 5.71e-42 W; a proton at the LHC: 1.9e+16 m/s², 2.06e-21 W; an electron in a linac: 2.0e+19 m/s², 2.28e-15 W; an electron in a hydrogen atom: 9.0e+22 m/s², 4.62e-8 W. The slope is two, measured on the drawn line. A charge held at one gravity radiates 5.49e-52 watts, which over the whole age of the universe comes to 2.39e-34 joules — far less than one photon of any kind. So the question of whether it radiates is not an experimental question about a charge on a table, and never has been. Every number here is a straight line on logarithmic axes with an exponent the figure measures.

Whether a charge on a table glows

The equivalence principle says a charge at rest in a gravitational field is a charge accelerating in empty space, and an accelerating charge radiates. Nothing is supplying the energy. The argument has run for eighty years, and its resolution is that radiation is not something a single observer can define.

astrophysics · Radiating charge Three centuries of finding nothing. The upper limit on η against the year it was set, on a logarithmic scale. Newton (1687) reached 1e-3; Bessel (1832) reached 2e-5; Eötvös (1922) reached 5e-9; Dicke (1964) reached 1e-11; Braginsky (1972) reached 1e-12; Eöt-Wash (2008) reached 2e-13; MICROSCOPE (2022) reached 1e-15. That is 12 orders of magnitude in 335 years, and every one of those measurements returned zero. A sequence of null results is not a sequence of failures. Each one is a statement that a principle assumed by every theory of gravity holds to a new level, and each new level excludes a class of theories that would have shown a departure there — a long-range force coupling to something other than mass-energy, a scalar partner to the graviton, a violation arising at some energy scale. The measurement is worth making again precisely because it has always come out the same way, which is what makes any departure decisive.

The fall that does not depend on what is falling

Everything falls at the same rate, and the statement has been tested for three hundred years by people looking for the exception. Twelve orders of magnitude have been added to the limit and every measurement has returned zero. The last three orders came not from a better instrument but from finding something bigger to fall towards.

astrophysics · Equivalence principle The paths in space: orbits of one period, and a throw straight up. The same free falls drawn in space around the Earth, which is the filled disc. All start at the marked point 2 Earth radii from the centre. The circle is the circular orbit. The ellipses, of eccentricity 0.2 and 0.4, have the same period, so they come back to the start at the same moment. The straight line is the thrown clock's path: straight up to 4.46 Earth radii and back down the same line, arriving as the orbits complete one revolution. The Earth's rotation is ignored and it is treated as a point mass for the paths that pass close to it.

The orbit that ages less than a throw

A clock in orbit and a clock thrown straight up leave the same point at the same moment and meet there again one period later. Both fall freely the whole way, so both follow paths of stationary proper time — and the thrown clock comes back 4.1 microseconds older. Even a clock held still by a rocket, which is not falling at all, beats the orbit. Free fall picks out a path that is stationary, not one that is longest.

relativity · Time dilation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Equivalence principleProper timeGeodesic deviationGravitational massInertial massSpacetime curvatureTidal forceCoordinate timeEvent horizonGeodesicGravitational redshiftLocal inertial frame

All concepts