Re: Does gravity do work on the freely falling body?

Phil wrote:
Gravity accelerates the inertial object.

While you continue to use ambiguous language without specifying what you mean, it is hopeless to continue.


Tom, have you been following my correspondence with PMB regarding the
accumulated effects of acceleration on doppler shift? This particular
approach determines un-ambiguously whether the surface frame is
accelerating or if the local inertial frames accelerate.

Hmmm. Your discussion is completely useless, due to the many PUNs you use. You will remain confused until you LEARN enough about GR to realize how ambiguous your language is.


Let acceleration be the time rate of change of velocity of an
accelerated object with respect to inertial objects.

Had you been paying attention, you would know this cannot be done. You can define it relative to coordinates in which the "inertial objects" are at rest, but cannot do so just "relative to inertial objects".


On the topic of Pound-Rebka, the outcome of the this experiment
DEPENDS upon the source and the detector not accelerating with respect
to one another.

This depends on one's definition of "accelerating". See my description in another thread of how to compute this -- what matters are the LOCATIONS and trajectories of source and detector at the events of emission and detection, the value of the metric at those locations, and the connection along the light path; all else is irrelevant in the actual computation (such as the distance some observer measures between them, or their accelerations [any meaning]).


Studying GR can resolve all your confusions and uncertainties. But it is non-trivial. A good start is:

Geroch, _General_Relativity_from_A_to_B_.

But to really understand GR you'll need to learn the underlying mathematics, which requires a bunch of good textbooks.


Tom Roberts
.