What part of General Relativity says gravity isn't real?!
As TheEngineer said earlier in this thread, "Gravity is a pseudo force that only arises by taking a non inertial frame of reference to be inertial. Gravitation is a consequence of the deformation of space, no force between objects necessary."
Yeah, I can see how The Engineer is the Theory of General Relativity.
"All fictitious forces are proportional to the mass of the object upon which they act, which is also true for gravity. This led Albert Einstein to wonder whether gravity was a fictitious force as well. He noted that a freefalling observer in a closed box would not be able to detect the force of gravity; hence, free falling reference frames are equivalent to an inertial reference frame (the equivalence principle). Following up on this insight, Einstein was able to show (after ~9 years of work) that gravity is indeed a fictitious force; the apparent acceleration is actually inertial motion in curved spacetime. This is the essential physics of Einstein's theory of general relativity." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_force
Amazing how no source is listed...
I assume you know that Wikipedia is unreliable without sources, especially for controversial topics?
"Is Gravity A Fictitious Force?
...
The strange and in some ways disturbing answer to this supposition is that the phenomenon of gravity (the fact that things fall, and have weight) is real, but the force of gravity, as described by Newton, is not a real force, but a fictitious force."
- http://cseligman.com/text/physics/fictitious.htm
"With general relativity, Einstein managed to blur forever the distinction between real and fictitious forces. General relativity is his theory of gravity, and gravity is certainly the paradigmatic example of a "real" force. The cornerstone of Einstein's theory, however, is the proposition that gravity is itself a fictitious force (or, rather, that it is indistinguishable from a fictitious force)." - http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=ABE57453-E7F2-99DF-32538FF7C7B37F20
"You have it essentially right
mdivito@cevo.com wrote:
> user_email -- mdivito@cevo.com
> question -- I was just looking for some clarification of a few things in regards to gravitation.
>
> GR basically showcases that gravity as a force doesn't exist, correct?
>
> Now, as I understand it, gravity only needs to exist as a force in Euclidean spacetime, and since GR states that spacetime is non-Euclidean, what we feel on Earth is therefore gravitation, and not gravity?
>
>
>
>
--
******************************************
F. Todd Baker
225 Henderson Ave.
Athens, GA 30602
Email: tbaker@physast.uga.edu
Phone: 706-546-xxxx
Cell: 706-714-xxxx
Web: http://www.ftoddbaker.com/
******************************************"
"This is analogous to what mass does to the structure of space-time. It causes a depression to form so that if an object rolls toward it, it falls into the pit and is captured. (This, by the way, is how Einstein envisioned how gravity works. Mass distorts the space-time causing particles to roll toward the mass. Note that the objects follow the shape of the space-time and in this sense are following an unforced motion! That is, there is no gravitational force, objects are simply following their natural motions.)" - http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/122/lecture-2/gw.html
Ignoring the controversy concerning whether or not to classify gravity as a force would leave you empty-handed. Classification is not relevant. Besides their is an exception to pretty much every rule I can think of. Gravity is classified as a force or not like light is partially considered particle/wave. Consider that no source you found doesn't have a countering source. Gravity isn't automatically fictional if people classify it differently.
An apparent exception would seem to be the force of gravity, which is also proportional to the mass upon which it acts. Although gravity can be considered a "real" physical force for the purposes of calculations in classical mechanics, Albert Einstein showed in his theory of general relativity that gravity itself can also be considered a fictitious force. In his theory, the free-falling reference frame is equivalent to an inertial reference frame (the equivalence principle). By contrast, Einstein noted that observers standing on the Earth are experiencing an unrecognized acceleration from the normal force pushing up on their feet and, thus, are in a non-inertial (accelerated) reference frame. Further details may be found under general relativity.
Every other source I have seen reinforces the concept that Einstein didn't see gravity as fictitious nor gravitation.
Gravitation is not fictitious.
I didn't say that it was. I suppose it might be unclear, but I can only see two ways it could be interpreted anyhow. 1. Neither gravity or gravitation is fictitious. or 2. Gravity isn't fictitious and gravity isn't gravitation. Never said gravitation was fictitious.
It seems that you and other FE'ers pick and choose which parts of laws of physics to support your claims and toss away the rest.
Other FEers? Supporting what claims? Picked what?
Supporting the claim that gravity is fictitious when you keep gravitation. Two elements of GR.
Gravitation is a consequence of the deformation of space, no force between objects necessary."
Why do you think gravity isn't caused as the deformation of space? Once, again classifying gravity as a force or not is not a complete argument by any means.
So what people standing on the surface of the Earth perceive as the 'force of gravity' is a result of their undergoing a continuous physical acceleration caused by the mechanical resistance of the surface on which they are standing.
How does this one help your case again?
And where is my response to your disagreement with TheEngineer? I need to understand everybody's position on the subject.